Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41210529›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2025

Comparative Analysis of Lung Ultrasound, Computed Tomography, and X-ray in the Diagnosis of Common Pathologies among Critically Ill Mechanically Ventilated Patients-A Prospective Observational Study.

Ashraf S Al Tayar, Hosni A Salem, Eslam E Abdelshafey, Mohamed A Rashwan, Mohmed F Khalil, Hebah A Alwafi, Walid S Alhabashy, Shamekh H Altayar, Nazeh E Elfakhrany, Dina H Zidan and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Lung Ultrasound in the ICU: Strengths, Limitations, and the Continued Role of Computed Tomography.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Author Response: Lung Ultrasound in the Intensive Care Unit: Strengths, Limitations, and the Continued Role of Computed Tomography.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. From Diagnostic Concordance to Implementation-grade Lung Ultrasound in Critical Care.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine
    Article
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

11 authors.

Ashraf S Al TayarDepartment of ICU, Karmouz Insurance Hospital, Alexandria, Egypt; Department of Acute Medicine, King's Mill Hospital, Sutton-in-Ashfield, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2897-7417
Hosni A SalemDepartment of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care and Pain, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1461-3871
Eslam E AbdelshafeyDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8018-2948
Mohamed A RashwanDepartment of ICU, Security Forces Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8987-0034
Mohmed F KhalilDepartment of ICU, Sheikh Khalifa Hospital, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7816-8610
Hebah A AlwafiDepartment of General Surgery, Security Forces Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8353-0845
Walid S AlhabashyDepartment of Anaesthesia and ICU, Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Dorset, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3967-7265
Shamekh H AltayarDepartment of ICU, Al Galaa Medical Military Complex, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-2688-1365
Nazeh E ElfakhranyDepartment of Acute Medicine, King's Mill Hospital, Sutton-in-Ashfield, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8724-8512
Dina H ZidanDepartment of Acute Medicine, Critical Care Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6067-9559
Prashant NasaDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, New Cross Hospital, The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1948-4060

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and aims: Chest X-ray (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) are established imaging modalities for patients in respiratory distress, and lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as an efficient point-of-care alternative. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of LUS and CXR in critically ill patients, utilizing CT thorax as the reference standard. Patient and methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary care intensive care unit (ICU) involving mechanically ventilated adult patients requiring CT thorax. Before the CT, patients underwent portable CXR and LUS. Diagnostic performance metrics were calculated using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and AUC-ROC for pneumothorax, pleural effusion, consolidation, collapse, and pulmonary edema for CXR and LUS compared to CT. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using Cohen's κ. Results: A total of 110 patients were included in this study. Overall, the performance of LUS was significantly superior to CXR for diagnosing various pathologies. Lung ultrasound exhibited 100% sensitivity and 97% specificity, outperforming CXR (66.7% sensitivity) for the detection of pneumothorax. For pleural effusion, LUS achieved 100% sensitivity and specificity, reflecting perfect concordance with CT, especially for moderate and severe pleural effusions, while CXR had an accuracy of only 68.18%. Lung consolidation and collapse were identified with 100% sensitivity and PPV by LUS. Furthermore, the accuracy of LUS in diagnosing pulmonary edema was 96.4%, with a specificity of 95.3% and an NPV of 100%. Conclusion: Across five pathologies that were evaluated in this study, LUS consistently outperformed CXR in diagnostic accuracy and concordance with CT thorax. How to cite this article: Al Tayar AS, Salem HA, Abdelshafey EE, Rashwan MA, Khalil MF, Alwafi HA,

Indexed as

Chest X-rayComputed tomographyCritically illLung consolidationLung ultrasoundMechanical ventilationPleural effusionPneumothoraxPulmonary edemaPulmonary pathology

Identifiers

PMID41210529
PMCPMC12592945

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.