ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2017
UK practice in the prevention of central venous catheter-associated thrombosis in adults on home parenteral nutrition.
Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMaintaining central access is imperative for the delivery of home parenteral nutrition (HPN) in those with intestinal failure. Methods to reduce central venous catheter infection are well recognised; however, the prevention of line thrombosis is less well studied.
methodsThis paper reviews the current evidence and reports a survey of current practice within the UK. Using an electronic survey, respondents were asked to detail their use of anticoagulation in different patient groups and the type of anticoagulation used.
results41 replies were received from 31 centres. Only one responder used low-dose warfarin routinely; 80% however anticoagulated those with a previous line thrombosis and 65% anticoagulated those that had any deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolus. The most commonly used anticoagulant was dose-adjusted warfarin aiming for an international normalised ratio of 2-3.
conclusionsThe evidence from the current literature in both HPN and the wider field is that there is no clear evidence that anticoagulation is either beneficial or harmful in the prevention of line thrombosis. This survey suggested that practice is varied across the UK likely reflecting the lack of evidence within the current literature.
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.