ReviewCureus2022
Success Rate and Complications of the Supraclavicular Approach for Central Venous Access: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Supraclavicular Access in Temporary Pacemaker Implantation.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2026Observational
- Subclavian Vein Cannulation via Supraclavicular or Infraclavicular Route Which is Better? A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024Article
- Comparing the Utility of Landmark-Palpation Guided to Ultrasound-Guided Teaching Methodologies for Subclavian Central Venous Access Using a Formalin-Embalmed Cadaver Model.Advances in medical education and practice · 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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Central venous catheterization plays a key role in patients that require immediate resuscitation, long-term fluid management, and invasive monitoring. The supraclavicular (SC) and infraclavicular (IC) approaches are utilized for central venous catheterization and both have their benefits and limitations. In this systematic review, we aim to explore the success rate and various complications of the SC technique. A literature review was conducted on the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases. All relevant original articles that evaluated success rates and complications of SC access were retrieved and included for qualitative synthesis. After screening 1040 articles, 28 studies were included for further analysis. The overall success rate of SC access ranged between 79% and 100%. The overall complication rate in SC access ranged between 0% and 24.24% (Mean: 4.27%). The most prevalent complication was arterial puncture (1.39%) followed by catheter malposition (0.42%). The SC approach can be used as an alternative to the IC technique because of its low access time and high success rate. The SC approach should be more commonly used in day-to-day central venous cannulation. Further studies on the role of ultrasound guidance are warranted for the SC approach.
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.