ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
Meta-analysis of ultrasound-guided and traditional femoral artery puncture.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construction and validation of a prediction model for complications of femoral artery access.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the ultrasound guidance and traditional methods in femoral artery puncture. Methods: We searched the databases to evaluate the rate of success on first attempt and the incidence of hematoma. The random effects model was used for performing a meta-analysis to estimate the odds ratio (ORs), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: A total of nine articles including 2,361 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The rate of success on first attempt were 79.6% (1,289/1,619) and 54.1% (883/1,644) in patients of the ultrasound group and traditional method group, respectively [OR = 3.14 (95% CI = 2.30-4.28), combined OR value Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided femoral artery puncture has certain advantages compared with traditional puncture with regard to success on first attempt and the incidence of hematoma. Moreover, ultrasound-guided puncture reduces the incidence of hematoma in the retrograde puncture group patients.
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.