Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36550346›Full record

Trial reportJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2023

Evaluation of a new insertion site for arterial pressure line in intensive care unit management: a prospective study.

Marina Oi, Takaaki Maruhashi, Yutaro Kurihara, Yasushi Asari

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marina OiDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minami-Ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, 252-0375, Japan.
Takaaki MaruhashiDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minami-Ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, 252-0375, Japan. tmaruhasi119@gmail.com.
Yutaro KuriharaDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minami-Ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, 252-0375, Japan.
Yasushi AsariDepartment of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Kitasato University School of Medicine, 1-15-1 Kitasato, Minami-Ku, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, 252-0375, Japan.
Kitasato University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The arterial pressure line (A-line) is primarily inserted through the radial artery. However, accidental removal due to joint movement can be problematic in the intensive care unit (ICU). This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of A-line insertion in the ICU through the distal radial approach (DRA), which is used in cardiac catheterization. This single-center, prospective, comparative study included 200 patients (≥ 20 years) who were brought to our hospital for emergency care and required A-line insertion. Patients were quasi-randomized to the traditional radial approach (TRA) or DRA. Data were recorded at the time of A-line insertion, administration, and removal. We evaluated the vessel diameter, number of punctures, success of the procedure, presence of complications, such as infection during management, and time taken for hemostasis after catheter removal. The primary endpoint was the accidental removal rate. Due to incomplete information, data were collected for 193 patients (96 TRA and 97 DRA). Successful procedures were observed in 95 of the 96 patients with TRA and 94 of the 97 patients with DRA. Guidewire use during insertion was significantly more common in the DRA group (P < 0.01) and post-puncture splint fixation was significantly more common in the TRA group (P < 0.01). Accidental removal, the primary endpoint, was observed in 10 patients with TRAs and 11 patients with DRAs, with no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.99). DRA is as safe and effective as the TRA, suggesting that it is useful as a new A-line insertion site.

Indexed as

Arterial PressureCatheterization, PeripheralHumansIntensive Care UnitsProspective StudiesRadial ArteryTreatment OutcomeAccidental removalArterial pressure lineDistal radial approachIntensive care unitTraditional radial approach

Identifiers

PMID36550346
OpenAlexW4312093050

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.