Suppr超能文献

休克快速超声检查(RUSH)的诊断准确性:一项系统评价与Meta分析

Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Ultrasound in Shock (RUSH) Exam; A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

作者信息

Keikha Mojtaba, Salehi-Marzijarani Mohammad, Soldoozi Nejat Reihane, Sheikh Motahar Vahedi Hojat, Mirrezaie Seyed Mohammad

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Shahroud University of Medical Sciences, Shahroud, Iran.

Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

出版信息

Bull Emerg Trauma. 2018 Oct;6(4):271-278. doi: 10.29252/beat-060402.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To perform a diagnostic accuracy of the rapid ultrasound in shock (RUSH) to diagnose the etiology of undifferentiated shock in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We searched the Medline via PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge till July 2017. Two independent reviewers screened studies for eligibility. Our study analysis is planned in accordance with the guidelines for meta-analysis of diagnostic studies. In the systematic search, of 397 references, 295 were excluded on the basis of the title and abstract. For the remaining 102 articles, the full text was retrieved and critically reviewed. After the selection process, five papers were included.

RESULTS

The pooled estimate of all data showed that the RUSH protocol exhibited high sensitivity (0.87, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.80-0.92, I2 = 46.7%) and specificity (0.98, 95% C. I.: 0.96-0.99, I2 = 30.8%). The AUC for SROC, a global measure of the RUSH protocol performance, was 0.98 ± 0.01, indicates the high accuracy of the test. Positive and negative likelihood ratios reported from the studies ranged from 9.83 to 51.32 and 0.04 to 0.33, respectively. The pooled estimate of all data showed that the RUSH protocol exhibited high positive likelihood ratio (19.19, 95% C. I.: 11.49-32.06, I2 = 14.1%) and low negative likelihood ratio (0.23, 95% C. I.: 0.15-0.34, I2 = 18.4%).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that RUSH protocol has generally good role to distinguish the states of shock in patients with undifferentiated shock referred to the emergency department.

摘要

目的

评估快速超声休克评估(RUSH)在诊断急诊科(ED)就诊的未分化休克患者病因方面的诊断准确性。

方法

我们通过PubMed、Scopus和ISI Web of Knowledge检索截至2017年7月的Medline。两名独立审稿人筛选符合条件的研究。我们的研究分析按照诊断研究的荟萃分析指南进行规划。在系统检索中,397篇参考文献中有295篇基于标题和摘要被排除。对于其余102篇文章,检索全文并进行严格评审。经过筛选过程,纳入了五篇论文。

结果

所有数据的合并估计显示,RUSH方案具有高敏感性(0.87,95%置信区间(CI):0.80 - 0.92,I² = 46.7%)和特异性(0.98,95% CI:0.96 - 0.99,I² = 30.8%)。SROC的AUC(衡量RUSH方案性能的综合指标)为0.98 ± 0.01,表明该测试具有高准确性。研究报告的阳性和阴性似然比分别为9.83至51.32和0.04至0.33。所有数据的合并估计显示,RUSH方案具有高阳性似然比(19.19,95% CI:11.49 - 32.06,I² = 14.1%)和低阴性似然比(0.23,95% CI:0.15 - 0.34,I² = 18.4%)。

结论

这项荟萃分析表明,RUSH方案在区分转诊至急诊科的未分化休克患者的休克状态方面通常具有良好作用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/10ed/6215077/93947a45fa44/bet-6-271-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Diagnostic Accuracy of Rapid Ultrasound in Shock (RUSH) Exam; A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Bull Emerg Trauma. 2018 Oct;6(4):271-278. doi: 10.29252/beat-060402.
3
Accuracy of Rapid Ultrasound in Shock (RUSH) Exam for Diagnosis of Shock in Critically Ill Patients.
Trauma Mon. 2015 Feb;20(1):e20095. doi: 10.5812/traumamon.20095. Epub 2015 Feb 20.
5
The impact of using RUSH protocol for diagnosing the type of unknown shock in the emergency department.
Emerg Radiol. 2015 Oct;22(5):517-20. doi: 10.1007/s10140-015-1311-z. Epub 2015 Mar 21.
8
Utility of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Differentiating Causes of Shock in Resource-Limited Setup.
J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2019 Jan-Mar;12(1):10-17. doi: 10.4103/JETS.JETS_61_18.
10
Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound for shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Crit Care. 2023 May 25;27(1):200. doi: 10.1186/s13054-023-04495-6.

引用本文的文献

1
Evolving role of point-of-care ultrasound in prehospital emergency care: a narrative review.
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2025 Jul 14;33(1):126. doi: 10.1186/s13049-025-01443-x.
3
Hocus pocus: advanced point-of-care ultrasound from the trauma bay to the surgical ICU.
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2025 Apr 14;10(Suppl 1):e001779. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2025-001779. eCollection 2025.
5
Use of Point-of-Care Ultrasound to Diagnose a Ruptured Splenic Hemangioma.
Cureus. 2024 Jul 2;16(7):e63698. doi: 10.7759/cureus.63698. eCollection 2024 Jul.
7
Inferior vena cava ultrasound and other techniques for assessment of intravascular and extravascular volume: an update.
Clin Kidney J. 2023 Jun 29;16(11):1861-1877. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfad156. eCollection 2023 Nov.
8
[Interpretation of the clinical guideline for point-of-care ultrasonography in the neonatal intensive care unit in the United States].
Zhongguo Dang Dai Er Ke Za Zhi. 2023 Jul 15;25(7):672-677. doi: 10.7499/j.issn.1008-8830.2302004.
9
Point-of-Care Ultrasound: A Multimodal Tool for the Management of Sepsis in the Emergency Department.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2023 Jun 20;59(6):1180. doi: 10.3390/medicina59061180.
10
ISCCM Guidelines for Hemodynamic Monitoring in the Critically Ill.
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2022 Oct;26(Suppl 2):S66-S76. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24301.

本文引用的文献

1
Trauma Ultrasound.
Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015 Oct;41(10):2543-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.05.009. Epub 2015 Jul 21.
2
The diagnosis of right heart thrombus by focused cardiac ultrasound in a critically ill patient in compensated shock.
Crit Ultrasound J. 2015 May 13;7:6. doi: 10.1186/s13089-015-0023-7. eCollection 2015.
3
The impact of using RUSH protocol for diagnosing the type of unknown shock in the emergency department.
Emerg Radiol. 2015 Oct;22(5):517-20. doi: 10.1007/s10140-015-1311-z. Epub 2015 Mar 21.
4
Critical care ultrasonography.
Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2014 Nov;32(4):907-26. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2014.07.011. Epub 2014 Aug 28.
5
Shock.
Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2014 Nov;32(4):747-58. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2014.07.003. Epub 2014 Aug 28.
7
Point-of-care multiorgan ultrasonography for the evaluation of undifferentiated hypotension in the emergency department.
Intensive Care Med. 2013 Jul;39(7):1290-8. doi: 10.1007/s00134-013-2919-7. Epub 2013 Apr 13.
8
Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006 Jul 12;6:31. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-31.
10
Summary receiver operating characteristic curve analysis techniques in the evaluation of diagnostic tests.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2005 Jan;79(1):16-20. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.09.040.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验