Occult pneumothoraces in ventilated pediatric trauma patients: a review

Neonatal and pediatric thoracic ultrasonography

“…Furthermore, the typical 'lung point' determines if the presence of pneumothorax is easily detectable on a scan, showing a transition from regular lung sliding to no lung sliding [25,26]. In those cases where lung sliding is not detectable on a scan, pneumothorax cannot be diagnosed with certainty, as the absence of lung sliding can also be a symptom of other conditions, such as RDS (respiratory distress syndrome) or reduced respiratory excursions in patients affected by acute abdomen, phrenic nerve alterations, respiratory compliance reduction in the chest apex, in obese subjects, or remarkable reduction of gliding signs in the apical due to pulmonary ligaments causing a marked fixation that strongly limits lung sliding.…”

Conservative management of occult pneumothorax in mechanically ventilated patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…166 Any study that did not have complete data for a given outcome was not included in the meta-analysis for that outcome; rather, the available study results were included in a narrative summary, where appropriate. The study by Fulton & Bratu 167 was not included in the statistical analysis as their planned 'ICC group' had no patients to include; it has been included in the narrative summary. Where statistical pooling was not possible, the findings are presented in narrative form, including tables and figures to aid in data presentation, where appropriate.…”

“…The exposure was measured in a consistent and reliable way in all cohort studies 10,16,167,169,170,[181][182][183][184] (Table 3.1, Questions 2 and 3). In seven studies 10,16,167,170,[182][183][184] , it was clear if confounding factors had been identified (Table 3.1, Question 4), with five 10,167,170,183,184 explaining how they dealt with these confounding factors (Table 3.1, Question 5), however the studies did not adjust effect estimates for the stated confounding factors. Participants in all the studies 10,16,167,169,170,[181][182][183][184] were free of the outcome at the beginning of the study (Table 3.1, Question 6).…”

“…In seven studies 10,16,167,170,[182][183][184] , it was clear if confounding factors had been identified (Table 3.1, Question 4), with five 10,167,170,183,184 explaining how they dealt with these confounding factors (Table 3.1, Question 5), however the studies did not adjust effect estimates for the stated confounding factors. Participants in all the studies 10,16,167,169,170,[181][182][183][184] were free of the outcome at the beginning of the study (Table 3.1, Question 6). Seven studies 10,167,170,[181][182][183][184] were clear on how they measured outcomes and did so in a reliable way ( Appraisal questions for cohort studies:…”

“…Participants in all the studies 10,16,167,169,170,[181][182][183][184] were free of the outcome at the beginning of the study (Table 3.1, Question 6). Seven studies 10,167,170,[181][182][183][184] were clear on how they measured outcomes and did so in a reliable way ( Appraisal questions for cohort studies:…”