ArticleWorld journal of clinical pediatrics2017
Off-label-use of sulfur-hexafluoride in voiding urosonography for diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux in children: A survey on adverse events.
Article in World journal of clinical pediatrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- 3D/4D contrast-enhanced urosonography (ceVUS) in children - is it superior to the 2D technique?Journal of ultrasonography · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the risk profile of sulfur hexafluoride in voiding urosonography (VUS) based on a large cohort of children.
methodsSince 2011 sulfur hexafluoride (SH, SonoVue
resultsNo acute adverse reactions were observed. The survey revealed subacute, mostly self-limited adverse events in 4.1% (22/531). The majority of observed adverse events (17/22) was not suspected to be caused by an allergic reaction: Five were related to catheter placement, three to reactivated urinary tract infections, five were associated with perineal disinfection before voiding urosonography or perineal dermatitis and four with a common cold. In five patients (0.9%) hints to a potential allergic cause were noted: Perineal urticaria was reported in three interviews and isolated, mild fever in two. These were minor self-limited adverse events with a subacute onset and no hospital admittance was necessary. Ninety-six point two percent of the parents would prefer future VUS examinations with use of SH.
conclusionNo severe adverse events were observed and indications of self-limited minor allergic reactions related to intravesical administration of SH were reported in less than 1%.
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.