Trial reportIndian journal of pediatrics2019
A Randomized Trial of Ultrasound- versus. Fluoroscopy-Guided Subclavian Vein Catheterization in Children with Hematologic Disease.
Trial report in Indian journal of pediatrics, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Necessity of Image Guidance for Subclavian Catheterization to Improve Patient Safety.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided subclavian vein catheterization in pediatric population with hematologic diseases.
methodsA randomized prospective study of subclavian vein catheterization in pediatric population with hematologic diseases was performed. After randomization, the patients were assigned to either ultrasound- or fluoroscopy-guided subclavian vein catheterization. The primary outcome was number of attempts at venous cannulation. Secondary outcomes included: catheterization success rate, fluoroscopy time, operation time, and surgical complications.
resultsThere were 170 children enrolled between February 2017 and July 2018. There was no difference between the two groups with regard to the demographic data. Success within 3 attempts was achieved in 82 cases (82/87, 92.0%) in the ultrasound (US) group vs. 65 cases (65/83, 78.3%) in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.002). The average operation time was 10(7) min in US group vs. 10(6) min in fluoroscopy group (P = 0.722). There were 3 complications in the US group, while there were 6 complications in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.321). There were 4 catheter-related thrombosis (CRTs) found in the US group during follow-up, however there was no CRT in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.121).
conclusionsUltrasound-guided venous puncture is a more accurate method of subclavian vein catheterization. However, the catheter tip can be placed more precisely by fluoroscopy. Thus, combined ultrasound-and fluoroscopy-guided technology is more efficient in subclavian vein catheterization of children with hematologic disease.
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.