Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27747022›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2016

Ultrasound-guided central vascular interventions, comments on the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology guidelines on interventional ultrasound.

Christoph F Dietrich, Rudolf Horn, Susanne Morf, Liliana Chiorean, Yi Dong, Xin-Wu Cui, Nathan S S Atkinson, Christian Jenssen

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. EUS elastography: How to do it?Endoscopic ultrasound
    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

8 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Christoph F DietrichMedical Department, Caritas-Krankenhaus Bad Mergentheim, Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany;; Sino-German Research Center of Ultrasound in Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450000, China.
Rudolf HornNotfallstation, Kantonsspital Glarus, Glarus, Switzerland.
Susanne MorfIntensivmedizin Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland.
Liliana ChioreanDepartment of Medical Imaging, des Cévennes Clinic, Annonay, France.
Yi DongTranslational Gastroenterology Unit, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK.
Xin-Wu CuiMedical Department, Caritas-Krankenhaus Bad Mergentheim, Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany;; Department of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China.
Nathan S S AtkinsonDepartment of Ultrasound, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China.
Christian JenssenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Krankenhaus Märkisch Oderland Strausberg, Wriezen, Germany.
Fudan University · CNHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CNKantonsspital Baselland · CHKantonsspital Graubünden · CHKrankenhaus Märkisch-Oderland · DEOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Central venous access has traditionally been performed on the basis of designated anatomical landmarks. However, due to patients' individual anatomy and vessel pathology and depending on individual operators' skill, this landmark approach is associated with a significant failure rate and complication risk. There is substantial evidence demonstrating significant improvement in effectiveness and safety of vascular access by realtime ultrasound (US)-guidance, as compared to the anatomical landmark-guided approach. This review comments on the evidence-based recommendations on US-guided vascular access which have been published recently within the framework of Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound (InVUS) of the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB) from a clinical practice point of view.

Indexed as

anatomic landmarkscentral venous cathetersGuidelinesinterventionultrasound-guidance (US-guidance)vascular access

Identifiers

PMID27747022
PMCPMC5059325
OpenAlexW2525134950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.