Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30778648›Full record

ReviewIntensive care medicine2019

Ultrasound-guided vascular access in critical illness.

G A Schmidt, M Blaivas, S A Conrad, F Corradi, S Koenig, M Lamperti, B Saugel, W Schummer, M Slama

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Intensive care medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04674371 (German Point Prevalence Study on Central Venous Catheter), which is not on this map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
16.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04674371 completednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

German Point Prevalence Study on Central Venous Catheter

TypeobservationalSponsorWolfram Schummer, MD, PhDRan2022 to 2022Enrolled537ConditionsData CollectionArmscentral venous catheter insertion
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.

G A SchmidtUniversity of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA. Gregory-a-schmidt@uiowa.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5013-6323
M BlaivasDepartment of Emergency Medicine, St. Francis Hospital, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbus, GA, USA.
S A ConradIke Muslow MD Endowed Chair of Health Informatics, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, USA.
F CorradiDepartment of Surgical, Medical and Molecular Pathology and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5588-2608
S KoenigDivision of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, New Hyde Park, NY, USA.
M LampertiAnesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Al Maryah Island, Abu Dhabi, UAE.ORCID 0000-0001-8270-2724
B SaugelDepartment of Anesthesiology, Center of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6619-0722
W SchummerFriedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7702-0558
M SlamaUnité de médecine intensive-réanimation, CHU Sud, Amiens, France.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Amiens-Picardie · FRCleveland Clinic · USFriedrich Schiller University Jena · DEHofstra University · USLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center Shreveport · USUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Iowa · USUniversity of Pisa · ITUniversity of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past two decades, ultrasound (US) has become widely accepted to guide safe and accurate insertion of vascular devices in critically ill patients. We emphasize central venous catheter insertion, given its broad application in critically ill patients, but also review the use of US for accessing peripheral veins, arteries, the medullary canal, and vessels for institution of extracorporeal life support. To ensure procedural safety and high cannulation success rates we recommend using a systematic protocolized approach for US-guided vascular access in elective clinical situations. A standardized approach minimizes variability in clinical practice, provides a framework for education and training, facilitates implementation, and enables quality analysis. This review will address the state of US-guided vascular access, including current practice and future directions.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Central VenousCritical IllnessHumansUltrasonography, InterventionalVascular Access DevicesCentral venous catheterComplicationsEducationUltrasoundVascular access

Identifiers

PMID30778648
OpenAlexW2917353059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.