Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40937039›Full record

ArticleCirculation reports2025

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Patients With Cardiogenic Shock - A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Takumi Osawa, Naoki Nakayama, Tomoko Ishizu, Toru Kondo, Takahiro Nakashima, Takeshi Yamamoto, Hiroyuki Hanada, Katsutaka Hashiba, Jin Kirigaya, Yumiko Hosoya and 18 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Circulation reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

28 authors.

Takumi OsawaDepartment of Cardiology, University of Tsukuba Ibaraki Japan.
Naoki NakayamaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Kumamoto University Hospital Kumamoto Japan.
Tomoko IshizuDepartment of Cardiology, University of Tsukuba Ibaraki Japan.
Toru KondoDepartment of Cardiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine Nagoya Japan.
Takahiro NakashimaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Kumamoto University Hospital Kumamoto Japan.
Takeshi YamamotoDivision of Cardiovascular Intensive Care, Nippon Medical School Hospital Tokyo Japan.
Hiroyuki HanadaEmergency, Disaster and General Medicine, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine Aomori Japan.
Katsutaka HashibaDepartment of Cardiology, Yokosuka General Medical Center Yokohama Japan.
Jin KirigayaDepartment of Cardiology, Yokohama City University Medical Center Yokoyama Japan.
Yumiko HosoyaDepartment of Cardiology, Sakakibara Heart Institute Tokyo Japan.
Aya Katasako-YabumotoDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center Osaka Japan.
Yusuke OkazakiDepartment of Cardiology, Steel Memorial Muroran Hospital Hokkaido Japan.
Masahiro YamamotoDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Kumamoto University Hospital Kumamoto Japan.
Kazuo SakamotoDepartment of Cardiology/Coronary Care Unit, Kyushu University Hospital Fukuoka Japan.
Marina AraiDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine Sendai Japan.
Akihito TanakaDepartment of Cardiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine Nagoya Japan.
Kunihiro MatsuoDepartment of Cardiology, Fukuoka Tokushukai Hospital Fukuoka Japan.
Junichi YamaguchiDepartment of Cardiology, Tokyo Women's Medical University Tokyo Japan.
Toshiaki ManoCardiovascular Center, Kansai Rosai Hospital Hyogo Japan.
Sunao KojimaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Kumamoto University Hospital Kumamoto Japan.
Teruo NoguchiDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center Osaka Japan.
Yasushi TsujimotoScientific Research WorkS Peer Support Group (SRWS-PSG) Osaka Japan.
Migaku KikuchiEmergency and Critical Care Center, Dokkyo Medical University Tochigi Japan.
Toshikazu FunazakiDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Kawaguchi Cupola Rehabilitation Hospital Saitama Japan.
Yoshio TaharaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center Osaka Japan.
Hiroshi NonogiPharmaceutical Sciences, University of Shizuoka Shizuoka Japan.
Tetsuya MatobaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Kyushu University Graduate School of medical Sciences Fukuoka Japan.
Resuscitation Council (JRC) Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) Cardiovascular Shock (CS) Task Force and the Guideline Editorial Committee on behalf of the Japanese Circulation Society (JCS) Emergency and Critical Care Committee

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cardiogenic shock, cardiac tamponade, and pulmonary embolism are critical conditions in cardiovascular emergencies, characterized by high mortality rates. Early diagnosis and treatment are essential to improve outcomes. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has emerged as a noninvasive tool for evaluating shock. However, further assessment through the latest meta-analyses is necessary to comprehensively evaluate its diagnostic accuracy in cardiogenic emergencies. Therefore, in this study, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS in patients with cardiogenic and obstructive shock. Methods and Results: Up to December 31, 2023, we systematically reviewed 9 studies reporting all 4 values (true positive, false positive, false negative, and true negative) published in the PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases: 8 studies assessed cardiac shock, and 8 assessed obstructive shock separately. For cardiac shock, the pooled sensitivity was 86.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 71.5-93.9%), and specificity was 95.8% (95% CI: 94.0-97.2%). For obstructive shock, the pooled sensitivity was 77.5% (95% CI: 62.5-87.6%) and specificity was 97.6% (95% CI: 93.9-99.1%). The area under the curve was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.95-0.98) for cardiogenic shock and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.88-0.98) for obstructive shock. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggested that POCUS has reasonable diagnostic accuracy for cardiogenic and obstructive shock, particularly with high pooled specificity.

Indexed as

Cardiogenic shockDiagnostic accuracyObstructive shockPoint-of-care ultrasoundShock

Identifiers

PMID40937039
PMCPMC12419987

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.