Lung ultrasound in dialysis: variable accuracy, no clear long-term outcome benefit
Diagnostic studies gave widely differing results, while randomized trials did not show improved survival or fewer cardiovascular events with ultrasound-guided fluid management.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
Lung ultrasound was studied both as a fluid-status test and as a way to guide dialysis care. Its diagnostic performance varied substantially between studies. The randomized evidence did not show better long-term outcomes, including survival and cardiovascular events. The review therefore leaves uncertainty about whether using the test to guide care improves patients’ health.
The review reports risk of bias and substantial differences between studies. This abstract-based summary cannot establish which diagnostic reference standards or control-care protocols were used, or how long patients were followed.
Different questions within the review
The review included studies that assessed fluid status and trials that assessed what happened when ultrasound informed management. These answer different questions: identifying fluid problems accurately does not by itself demonstrate better long-term outcomes.
How the authors position the test
The authors suggest that ultrasound could complement existing care. That suggestion should be read alongside the inconsistent diagnostic results and trial findings, which do not establish a reduction in deaths or cardiovascular complications.
The original publication
Lung ultrasound for fluid assessment in patients receiving dialysis-a systematic review.
Petersen NA, Schultz ANØ, Falster C et al.
J Nephrol · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 41182558
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.