Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34341863›Full record

SynthesisJournal of anesthesia2021

Central venous catheterization site choice based on anatomical landmark technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yang Gu, Keting Min, Qingqing Zhang, Zhigang Chen, Di Feng, Juan Wei, Xiaohong Jin, Huanping Zhou, Jiong Song, Xin Lv

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of anesthesia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yang Gu *Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 507 Zhengmin Rd, Shanghai, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9277-2846
Keting Min *Department of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Anhui, China.
Qingqing Zhang *Department of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 507 Zhengmin Rd, Shanghai, China.
Zhigang ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 507 Zhengmin Rd, Shanghai, China.
Di FengDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 507 Zhengmin Rd, Shanghai, China.
Juan WeiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 507 Zhengmin Rd, Shanghai, China.
Xiaohong JinDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Jiangxi, China.
Huanping ZhouDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 507 Zhengmin Rd, Shanghai, China.
Jiong SongDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 507 Zhengmin Rd, Shanghai, China.
Xin LvDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 507 Zhengmin Rd, Shanghai, China. xinlv@tongji.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3352-7162
Tongji University · CNNanchang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternal jugular vein catheterization (IJVC) and subclavian vein catheterization (SCVC) have been the most preferred central venous catheterizations (CVC) clinically. Individual preference and institutional routine dominate the traditional CVC choice; however, it is lack of high-level evidence. We sought to provide better clinical strategy for CVC site choice based on anatomical landmark technique between IJVC and SCVC.

methodsWe systematically reviewed eligible studies from PubMed, OVID, Cochrane and ClinicalTrials.Gov till February 2020. The primary outcomes were catheterization time and overall success rate, and the secondary outcomes were the first-attempt success rate and the instant mechanical complications. Ethical problems are not applicable.

resultsA total of 3378 patients from 7 studies were included in the analyses. Neither difference was found on the catheterization time (SMD 95% CI: -0.095-0.124, p = 0.792), nor any difference on the overall success rate (RR = 1.017, 95% CI: 0.927-1.117, p = 0.721, I

conclusionsCompared with IJVC, SCVC shows a higher overall success rate while a lower first-attempt success rate in adults, and has involved with less hematoma. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42020165444.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Central VenousPneumothoraxAdultHumansJugular VeinsAnatomyCatheterizationJugular veinSubclavian vein

Identifiers

PMID34341863
OpenAlexW3193103088

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.