ArticleJornal vascular brasileiro2023
Needle visualization during ultrasound-guided puncture: image optimization.
Article in Jornal vascular brasileiro, 2023. 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.
- Comparison of Franseen and novel tricore needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in a porcine liver model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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
Background: Obtaining an adequate image of the needle by ultrasound reduces complications resulting from punctures, increasing patient safety and reducing hospitalization costs. Objectives: To verify human perception in relation to number of pixels, while also identifying the best puncture angle and which needle should be used, and to evaluate whether there is a difference if needle visualization software is used. Methods: 20 images were analyzed by 103 students who classified them as being sufficient or insufficient and were compared with the quality observed using photoshop. We evaluated whether there were differences between puncture angles of less than 45º and more than 45º, between IV catheter and introducer needles, and between images obtained with and without visualization software. Results: There was a higher percentage of sufficient ratings for images those that had more than 60 pixels and when the puncture angle was less than 45º, with significant associations between students' evaluations and each of these groups (p < 0.001). The percentages of images classified as sufficient were higher for images in which a IV catheter was used and also higher for those using the needle visualization software, with significant associations between the results for students' classifications and each of these groups (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The human eye classifies an image as sufficient according to higher numbers of pixels. Images of punctures at angles smaller than 45º in relation to the surface, of punctures performed with a IV catheter, and when using specific visualization software are also better detected by the human eye.
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.