ArticleCVIR endovascular2022
Percutaneous closure of accidentally subclavian artery catheterization: time to change first line approach?
Article in CVIR endovascular, 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.
- [Perioperative complications during transvenous pacemaker and defibrillator implantation].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2026Review
- Anomalous Pulmonary Vein Drainage Into the Innominate Vein Diagnosed After Central Line Placement: A Case Report Along With a Review of Rare Congenital Anatomy Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Return.Journal of medical cases · 2025Article
- Accidental central venous catheter cannulation into aberrant arterial anatomy requiring endovascular intervention.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo present our experience and provide a literature review dissertation about the use of a suture-mediated percutaneous closure device (Perclose Proglide -PP- Abbott Vascular Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) to achieve hemostasis for unintended subclavian arterial catheterization during central venous line placement. MATERIALS &
methodsSince October 2020, we have successfully treated four consecutive patients with a central venous catheter (8 to 12 French) in the subclavian artery. In each patient, we released a PP, monitoring its efficacy by performing a subclavian angiogram and placing, as a rescue strategy, an 8 mm balloon catheter near the entry point of the misplaced catheter. Primary outcome is technical and clinical success. Technical success is defined as absence of bleeding signs at completion angiography, while clinical success is a composite endpoint defined as absence of hematoma, hemoglobin loss at 12 and 24 h, and absence of procedure-related reintervention (due to vessel stenosis, pseudoaneurysm or distal embolization).
resultsTechnical success was obtained in 75% of cases. In one patient a mild extravasation was resolved after 3 min of balloon catheter inflation. No early complications were observed for all patients.
conclusionsPP showed a safe and effective therapeutic option in case of unintentional arterial cannulation. It can be considered as first-line strategy, as it does not preclude the possibility to use other endovascular approaches in case of vascular closure device failure.
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.