Trial reportMedicine2019
A novel method of Uniblocker placement: extraluminal technique supported by trachea length measurement: A CONSORT-compliant article.
Trial report in Medicine, 2019. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- One-lung ventilation with a bronchial blocker in thoracic patients.BMC anesthesiology · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of bronchial blockers has been increased for one-lung ventilation; however, the placement of bronchial blockers is time consuming. The objective of this study was to compare the novel extraluminal technique of Uniblocker placement supported by trachea length measurement on computerized tomography images with conventional intraluminal Uniblocker placement method.
methodsSeventy adult patients undergoing left side thoracic surgery were included in the study. All the patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: conventional intraluminal intubation group (CV-IN group, n = 35) or extraluminal CT guided group (CT-EX group, n = 35). The primary endpoints were the optimal positions of Uniblocker and the injuries of bronchi and carina. The secondary outcomes included the time of Uniblocker placement, the adequacy of lung collapse, the incidences of Uniblocker displacement, sore throat, and hoarseness postoperative.
resultsIn the CV-IN group, 19 of 35 Uniblockers went to the left main-stem bronchus on the initial blind insertion and 15 of 35 Uniblockers were considered as in optimal depth, whereas in the CT-EX group, 32 of 35 Uniblockers went to the left main-stem bronchus on the initial blind insertion and 31 of 35 Uniblockers were considered as in optimal depth (P < .01). The incidence of bronchi and carina injuries was obviously lower in the CT-EX group (occurred in 1 of 35 cases) than that in the CV-IN group (occurred in 8 of 35 cases) (P < .05). The time of Uniblocker placement took 145.4 s in the CV-IN group and 85.4 s in the CT-EX group (P < .01). The malpositions of Uniblocker, the degree of pulmonary collapse and the adverse events postoperative such as sore throat and hoarseness were not significantly different between the two groups (P > .05).
conclusionThe novel extraluminal technique of Uniblocker placement supported by trachea length measurement on computerized tomography images was proved to be more rapid, more accurate and less complications than conventional intraluminal Uniblocker placement method.
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.