ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Determinants of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheter Implantation Time by Ultrasound Guidance: A Single-Center Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheter Insertion: Technical and Clinical Considerations.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2023Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe have previously reported that the ultrasound (US)-guided tip positioning is an accurate and safe procedure for placement of retrograde- and antegrade-tunneled hemodialysis catheters (HDCs). However, determinants of tunneled hemodialysis catheter implantation time by using US guidance have not been described yet. Therefore, we here report a comparative analysis to identify determinants of implantation time for retrograde- and antegrade-tunneled HDCs placement by US guidance.
methodsWe performed a cross-sectional study to compare implantation time for US-guided tip positioning of retrograde- and antegrade-tunneled HDCs. We included a total number of 47 tunneled HDC insertions, including 23 retrograde tunneled and 24 antegrade-tunneled HDCs in patients requiring placement of an HDC for the temporary or permanent treatment of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in a single-center, cross-sectional pilot study.
resultsWe show that clinical and laboratory parameters did not differ between retrograde- and antegrade-tunneled HDC implantations. There was a tendency for shorter implantation time in antegrade-tunneled HDCs, although not statistically significant. Finally, we identified an independent inverse association between body weight (BW) and platelet counts with HDC implantation time specifically in antegrade-tunneled HDCs.
conclusionIn this study, we identified determinants for tunneled HDC implantation time that might be relevant for patients and interventionists.
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.