Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27847699›Full record

ArticleAnesthesiology and pain medicine2016

Ultrasound for Localization of Central Venous Catheter: A Good Alternative to Chest X-Ray?

Hamid Kamalipour, Sedigheh Ahmadi, Karmella Kamali, Alireza Moaref, Masih Shafa, Parsa Kamalipour

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anesthesiology and pain medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hamid KamalipourAnesthesiology and Critical Care Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Sedigheh AhmadiAnesthesiology and Critical Care Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Karmella KamaliMedical Imaging Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Alireza MoarefDepartment of Cardiology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Masih ShafaDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Parsa KamalipourShiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Shiraz University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChest radiography after central venous catheter (CVC) insertion is the main method of verifying the catheter location. Despite the widespread use of radiography for detecting catheter position, x-ray may not always be readily available, especially in the operating room.

objectivesWe aimed to compare contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) and chest radiography for detecting the correct location of CVCs.

methodsOne hundred sixteen consecutive patients with indications for CVC before cardiac surgery were enrolled in this observational study. After catheter insertion, CEUS was performed. Portable radiography was obtained postoperatively in the intensive care unit. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined by comparing the ultrasonography results with radiographic findings as a reference standard.

resultsChest radiography revealed 16 CVC misplacements: two cases of intravascular and 14 cases of right atrium (RA) misplacement. CEUS detected 11 true catheter malpositionings in the RA, while it could not recognize seven catheter placements correctly. CEUS showed two false RA misplacements and five falsely correct CVC positions. A sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 69% were achieved for CEUS in detecting CVC misplacements. Positive and negative predictive values were 95% and 85%, respectively. The interrater agreement (kappa) between CEUS and radiography was 0.72 (P < 0.001).

conclusionsDespite close concordance between ultrasonography and chest radiography, CEUS is not a suitable alternative for standard chest radiography in detecting CVC location; however, considering its high sensitivity and acceptable specificity in our study, its usefulness as a triage method for detecting CVC location on a real-time basis in the operating room cannot be ignored.

Indexed as

CatheterizationCentral VenousInterventionalRadiographyThoracicUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID27847699
PMCPMC5101724
OpenAlexW2498419738

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.