SynthesisNan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University2020
[Short-axis
Synthesis in Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing short-axis versus long-axis ultrasound-guided techniques for internal jugular vein cannulation: A meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and safety.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2024Review
- 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
- Comparison of ultrasound-guided internal jugular vein cannulation versus supraclavicular approach to brachiocephalic vein cannulation- A prospective, single-blind, randomised study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- [Application of ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization at various sites in infants with shock].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the success rate and safety of the short-axis (SAX) approach and long- axis (LAX) approach to ultrasound-guided central venous cannulation.
methodsElectronic bibliographic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing ultrasound-guided central venous cannulation via the LAX and SAX approaches published during the period from January, 2011 to October, 2017. We extracted the data from the eligible studies and assessed the first-attempt success rate, overall puncture success rate and complication rate of the two approaches. The relative risk (RR) with the 95%
resultsSeven randomized controlled trials were included for meta-analysis. The results showed that the first-attempt success rate was significantly higher in the SAX group than in the LAX group (RR=1.27, 95%
conclusionsUltrasound-guided central venous cannulation via the SAX approach, as compared with the LAX approach, can increase first-attempt success rate and reduce the incidence of accidental arterial puncture.
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.