Trial reportPloS one2022
Combined short-axis out-of-plane and long-axis in-plane approach versus long-axis in-plane approach for ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization in infants and small children: A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Different axis approaches for ultrasound-guided centrally inserted central catheterization in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- A Novel Modified Ultrasound-Guided Venipuncture Technique for Non-Tunneled PICC Insertion in a Non-Operating Room Anesthesia (NORA) Setting: A Technical Report with Real-World Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ultrasound-guided long-axis in-plane approach for central venous catheterization in infants and small children can prevent posterior wall penetration. The combined short-axis out-of-plane and long-axis in-plane approach reportedly prevents such penetration in adults. To test the hypothesis of non-inferiority of the combined approach to the long-axis in-plane approach, we compared the two approaches in infants and small children. Patients were randomized based on whether they underwent ultrasound-guided internal jugular vein catheterization using the combined or long-axis in-plane approach. Posterior wall penetration rates, first-attempt success rates, overall success rates within 20 min; scanning, puncture, and procedure durations; and number of attempts were compared between the groups. In the combined and long-axis in-plane groups (n = 55 per group), the posterior wall penetration rates were 5.5% (3/55) and 3.6% (2/55) (P = 0.65), the first-attempt success rates were 94.5% (52/55) and 92.7% (51/55) (P = 0.70), and the overall success rates within 20 min were 100% (55/55) and 98.2% (54/55) (P = 0.32), respectively. In the combined and long-axis in-plane groups, the median (interquartile range) scanning durations were 21 (16.5-34.8) s and 47 (29.3-65) s (P<0.0001), the puncture durations were 114 (83-170) s and 74 (52.3-117.3) s (P = 0.0002), and the procedure durations were 141 (99-97.8) s and 118 (88.5-195.5) s (P = 0.14), respectively. The median number of attempts was 1 (interquartile range: 1-1, range: 1-3) in both groups (P = 0.72). Similar to the long-axis in-plane approach, the combined approach for internal jugular vein catheterization prevented posterior wall penetration in infants and small children. Trial registration: This trial was registered before patient enrollment in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry, registration number UMIN000039387 (https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-bin/ctr/ctr_view_reg.cgi?recptno=R000044907).
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.