ArticleInternational journal of health sciences
Access times for supraclavicular and infraclavicular approaches of subclavian vein catheterization in pacemaker insertion.
Article in International journal of health sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Success Rate and Complications of the Supraclavicular Approach for Central Venous Access: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2022Review
- Rate of various access sites for temporary transvenous pacing and different outcomes at Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar Pakistan.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInfraclavicular (IC) approach of subclavian vein (SCV) catheterization is widely used as compared to supraclavicular (SC) approach for pacemaker insertion. The aim of the study was to compare the ease of catheterization of SCV using SC versus IC approach and also record the incidence of complications related to the approach.
methodsIn the prospective and interventional study, 102 patients enrolled were randomly divided into two groups. In one group, the right SCV catheterization was performed using SC approach, and in the other group, catheterization was performed using IC approach. The total number of participants, who fulfilled the requirements, was 92. Access time, success rate of cannulation, number of attempts to cannulate vein, ease of guidewire and catheter insertion, placement of temporary wire as cine time, patient comfort, and associated complications were recorded. The data collected were analyzed on SPSS software version 26.
resultsThe SC approach had a lesser access time as compared to IC approach and this was found to be significant. Non-significant parameters included complications, number of attempts, and cine time. Only one patient from the IC group developed pneumothorax.
conclusionsThe SC approach of SCV catheterization is comparable to IC approach in terms of landmark accessibility, success rate, and rate of complications. However, IC approach is less feasible in terms of time constraint and is, therefore, less likely to be successful.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32536844PMC7269626What 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.