Perioperative medicine & outcomes

Lung ultrasound-guided decongestion in heart failure patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

J Crit CarePublished Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

Pooled result · HF hospitalization/all-cause mortalityResult — go to the resultRelative risk 0.72 95% CI 0.56–0.93

Authors' conclusion

LUS-guided decongestion was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of HF re-hospitalization and HF urgent visits, with a tolerable safety profile, compared to standard care, with similar rates of hypotension, hypokalemia, hyperkalemia, and AKI.

Study context

Population
Patients with decompensated heart failure (HF)
Participants
1,095 patients · 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
Comparison
Lung ultrasound (LUS)-guided management vs standard of care
Outcome
HF hospitalization/all-cause mortality
Methodological detailsfixed-effects model
  • Fixed-effects model

Pooled result

As reported in the abstract

Relative risk

0.72

95% CI 0.56–0.93

P = 0.01

LUS-guided management vs Standard of care
RR 0.72 (95% CI 0.56–0.93); P = 0.01

Further pooled results

OutcomeRR (95% CI)P value
HF hospitalization0.65 (0.48–0.88)P = 0.01
HF urgent visits0.38 (0.22–0.66)P < 0.0001

Safety

OutcomeRR (95% CI)P value
Hypotension1.87 (0.56–6.20)P = 0.31
Hypokalemia0.93 (0.48–1.82)P = 0.83
Hyperkalemia0.98 (0.62–1.53)P = 0.91
AKI/impaired renal function1.08 (0.66–1.77)P = 0.75

Original publication

Lung ultrasound-guided decongestion in heart failure patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Crit Care. Published 4 February 2026. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2026.155435

Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →

Get them every week

New studies on this topic in My Week and in your Monday e-mail.

We e-mail you a sign-in link and a code. No password, no spam.