ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2018
Comparison between the long-axis/in-plane and short-axis/out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided vascular catheterization: an updated meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- [Short-axisNan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2020Pooled it
- Comparison of short and long axis ultrasound-guided approaches to internal jugular vein puncture: a meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2019Pooled it
- Clinical Effect of Modified Ultrasound-Guided Subclavian Vein Puncture.International journal of clinical practice · 2023Trial
- Ergonomics Risk Assessment of Musculoskeletal Disorder During Ultrasound-Guided Internal Jugular Venous Cannulation.The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS · 2024Article
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice of non-emergency surgical patients toward anesthesia.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Short-axis versus long-axis approach for ultrasound-guided vascular access: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Internal jugular access using pocket ultrasound in a simulated model: comparison between biplane and monoplane visualization techniques.The ultrasound journal · 2023Article
- How to improve the efficiency and the safety of real-time ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization in 2023: a narrative review.Annals of intensive care · 2023Review
- Ultrasound-guided vascular access in critical illness.Intensive care medicine · 2019Review
- Comparison of novel anteroposterior short-axis in-plane technique with conventional short-axis out-of-plane technique for ultrasound-guided internal jugular vein cannulation: A randomized-controlled trial.Turkish journal of emergency medicineArticle
- Comparative evaluation of success of ultrasound-guided internal jugular vein cannulation using needle with guard: A randomized, controlled study.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA long-axis in-plane (LA-IP) approach and a short-axis out-of-plane (SA-OOP) approach are the two main approaches used in ultrasound (US)-guided vascular catheterization. However, the efficacy and safety of these approaches remain controversial. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to compare the two techniques in vascular catheterization. MATERIALS AND
methodsRelevant studies were searched in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from database inception until August 2017. Randomized controlled trials comparing a long-axis approach with a short-axis approach for US-guided vascular cannulation were selected. The RevMan software was used to analyze the results, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) was further applied to determine whether the currently available evidence was sufficient and conclusive.
resultsEleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 1,210 patients were included. The total success rate was similar between the SA-OOP and LA-IP approaches for US-guided vascular catheterization (risk ratio [RR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.99-1.04;
conclusionDespite a similar total success rate between the SA-OOP approach and the LA-IP approach when used for RA and IJV catheterization (as confirmed by TSA), further robust well-designed trials are warranted to evaluate other outcomes. There is insufficient evidence to definitively state that the SA-OOP approach was superior to the LA-IP approach when used for SCV and axillary vein catheterization. High-quality trials are needed to confirm or refute this finding.
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.