Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27716692›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of cardiac anaesthesia

Comparison between marked versus unmarked introducer needle in real-time ultrasound-guided central vein cannulation: A prospective randomized study.

Tanmoy Ghatak, Ratender Kumar Singh, Arvind Kumar Baronia

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of cardiac anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tanmoy GhatakDepartment of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, IIMS and R, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Ratender Kumar SinghDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, SGPGIMS, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Arvind Kumar BaroniaDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, SGPGIMS, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences · INIndian Institute of Management Lucknow · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIntroducer needle tip is not clearly visible during the real-time ultrasound (US)-guided central vein cannulation (CVC). Blind tip leads to mechanical complications. This study was designed to evaluate whether real-time US-guided CVC with a marked introducer needle is superior to the existing unmarked needle. METHODOLOGY: Sixty-two critically ill patients aged 18-60 years of either sex were included in the study. The patients were randomized into two groups based on whether a marked or unmarked introducer needle was used. Both groups underwent real-time US-guided CVC by a single experienced operator. Aseptically, introducer needle was indented with markings spaced 0.5 cm (single marking) and every 1 cm (double marking). This needle was used in the marked group. Approximate depths (centimeter) of the anterior and posterior wall of the internal jugular vein, anterior wall of the internal carotid artery, and lung pleura were appreciated from the midpoint of the probe in short-axis view at the level of the cricoid cartilage. Access time (seconds) was recorded using a stopwatch. A number of attempts and complications such as arterial puncture, hematoma, and pneumothorax of either procedure were compared.

resultsBoth marked needle and unmarked needle groups were comparable with regard to age, gender, severity scores, platelet counts, prothrombin time, and distance from the midpoint of the probe to the vein, artery, and pleura and skin-to-guide wire insertion access time. However, an average number of attempts (P = 0.03) and complications such as hematoma were significantly lower (P = 0.02) with the marked introducer needle group. Pneumothorax was not reported in any of the groups.

conclusionOur study supports the idea that marked introducer needle can further reduce the iatrogenic complications of US-guided CVC.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCatheterization, Central VenousFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesUltrasonography, InterventionalYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID27716692
PMCPMC5070321
OpenAlexW2527907648

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.