Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27075364›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2016

Use of intra-osseous access in adults: a systematic review.

F Petitpas, J Guenezan, T Vendeuvre, M Scepi, D Oriot, O Mimoz

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT04130984 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Intraosseous Versus Intravenous Vascular Access During Resuscitation Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorSecond Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, School of MedicineRan2020 to 2023Enrolled2,356ConditionsOut-of-Hospital Cardiac ArrestArmsEZ-IO
NCT04135547 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Venous Injection Compared To intraOsseous Injection During Resuscitation of Patients With Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest (The VICTOR Trial)

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Taiwan University HospitalRan2020 to 2023Enrolled1,732ConditionsEmergency Medical Service, Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, Vascular Access, Intraosseous AccessArmsintra-osseous access vs. intra-venous access
NCT06640491 phase1 / phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Intraosseous Vancomycin and Cefazolin vs Intravenous Administration in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Methodist Hospital Research InstituteRan2025 to 2035Enrolled40ConditionsTotal Knee ArthroplastyArmsIO Administration of Cefazolin, IO Administration of Vancomycin, IV Administration of Cefazolin, IV Administration of Vancomycin
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 160 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. [S3 Guideline Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and aftercare : Long version].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020
    Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. A dramatic case: fatal air embolism due to intraosseous puncture.International journal of emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Evaluation of the use of intraosseous access on adult patients presenting to the emergency department in urban South Africa.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2025
    Article
  12. Cardiac Arrest: Can Technology Be the Solution?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

F PetitpasDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital of Poitiers, 86021 Poitiers, France.
J GuenezanEmergency Department, University Hospital of Poitiers, 86021 Poitiers, France. jeremyguenezan@gmail.com.
T VendeuvreOrthopedic Surgical Department, University Hospital of Poitiers, 86021, Poitiers, France.
M ScepiLaboratory of Anatomy, Biomechanics and Simulation, University Hospital of Poitiers, 86021, Poitiers, France.
D OriotLaboratory of Anatomy, Biomechanics and Simulation, University Hospital of Poitiers, 86021, Poitiers, France.
O MimozDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, University Hospital of Poitiers, 86021 Poitiers, France.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers · FRUniversité de Poitiers · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndications for intra-osseous (IO) infusion are increasing in adults requiring administration of fluids and medications during initial resuscitation. However, this route is rarely used nowadays due to a lack of knowledge and training. We reviewed the current evidence for its use in adults requiring resuscitative procedures, the contraindications of the technique, and modalities for catheter implementation and skill acquisition.

methodsA PubMed search for all articles published up to December 2015 was performed by using the terms "Intra-osseous" AND "Adult". Additional articles were included by using the "related citations" feature of PubMed or checking references of selected articles. Editorials, comments and case reports were excluded. Abstracts of all the articles that the search yielded were independently screened for eligibility by two authors and included in the analysis after mutual consensus. In total, 84 full-text articles were reviewed and 49 of these were useful for answering the following question "when, how, and for which population should an IO infusion be used in adults" were selected to prepare independent drafts. Once this step had been completed, all authors met, reviewed the drafts together, resolved disagreements by consensus with all the authors, and decided on the final version.

resultsIO infusion should be implemented in all critical situations when peripheral venous access is not easily obtainable. Contraindications are few and complications are uncommon, most of the time bound to prolonged use. The IO infusion allows for blood sampling and administration of virtually all types of fluids and medications including vasopressors, with a bioavailability close to the intravenous route. Unfortunately, IO infusion remains underused in adults even though learning the technique is rapid and easy.

conclusionsIndications for IO infusion use in adults requiring urgent parenteral access and having difficult intravenous access are increasing. Physicians working in emergency departments or intensive care units should learn the procedures for catheter insertion and maintenance, the contraindications of the technique, and the possibilities this access offers.

Indexed as

AdultEmergency Medical ServicesHumansInfusions, IntraosseousInjections, IntravenousResuscitationEmergencyIntensive care unitSafetySkill acquisition

Identifiers

PMID27075364
PMCPMC4831096
OpenAlexW2338385029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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 OpenQuestion graph.