ReviewDer Anaesthesist2017
[Avoidance of complications when dealing with central venous catheters in the treatment of children].
Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Central venous catheters (CVCs) are an important tool in the treatment of children. The insertion of a catheter may result in different complications depending of the type of catheter, the technique used for the insertion and the location. There are various techniques to reduce the risk of complications. In order to reduce the rate of complications of CVCs it is indispensable to perform a risk-benefit analysis for the individual patient before every insertion. The type of catheter used (for example tunneled catheters versus not-tunneled catheters) influences the rate of catheter-associated infections and the comfort of the patient significantly. The choice of the location is influenced by the expected indwelling time, the weight of the patient and the purpose of the CVC. Insertion via the vena jugularis interna is often chosen because of the reduced rate of complications during insertion. When the planned indwelling time of the catheter is longer or the child is fairly small the vena subclavia appears to be more appropriate. It is of utmost importance that the patient is positioned properly before insertion. Whenever possible the insertion should be performed with the help of ultrasound. The positioning of the catheter should be verified radiographically, possibly sonographically or with an ECG in order to avoid misplacement with potentially severe sequelae. The locally established hygienic guidelines should be strictly adhered to and everyone handling CVCs (doctors, nurses and patients) should have regular training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.