ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2016
Inserting central venous catheter in emergency conditions in coagulopathic patients in comparison to noncoagulopathic patients.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing anatomical knowledge and confidence in central venous catheter insertion: a single-center cross-sectional study among physicians in a resource-limited setting.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Bleeding Risk of Central Venous Catheterization in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Review
- Practical anatomical landmark for optimal positioning of left-sided long-term central venous catheter (a pilot study).Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe current study was designed to compare the complications and adverse effects of central venous catheter (CVC) insertion under ultrasound guidance in patients with and without coagulopathy. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this clinical trial, 59 patients who needed CVC for various reasons were enrolled. Patients were divided into two groups of those with and without coagulopathy based on complete blood count, prothrombin time, partial thromboplastin time, and international normalized ratio test results, and then, CVC was inserted with ultrasound guidance in both groups. The CVC inserting site was examined for hematoma and hemorrhage in four stages at different times.
resultsThere was no significant difference in the terms of demographic features, catheter lumen size (
conclusionAccording to our results, it can be concluded that inserting CVC with ultrasound guidance under emergency conditions causes no serious and life-threatening complications in coagulopathic patients.
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.