ArticleBiomedicine hub
Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Umbilical Venous Catheter Insertion with Blind Method: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Biomedicine hub. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-time ultrasound to assess the umbilical catheter position in neonates: a randomized, controlled trial.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Trial
- Point-of-care ultrasound for umbilical venous catheter placement and surveillance in neonates: practical guidance and governance.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Real-time ultrasound for umbilical venous catheter insertion in neonates- a systematic review and meta-analysis.The ultrasound journal · 2025Review
- Real-time ultrasound guidance improves neonatal umbilical venous catheter placement efficiency and reduces liver complications.Frontiers in pediatrics · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Ultrasonography (USG) can be used in neonates to manipulate and place the umbilical catheter in the correct position. Although chest radiograph (CXR) is the gold standard, a noninvasive method like USG without radiation exposure may be an alternative bedside armamentarium to the clinician. The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether USG-guided umbilical venous catheter (UVC) insertion is superior to the conventional method for the successful insertion of UVC. Method: The neonates born between 25 and 42 weeks of gestation requiring parenteral fluids and admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) between September 2020 and November 2022 were randomized in two weight-based strata: ≤1,200 and >1,200 g. USG-guided UVC insertion was done in the intervention group and blind UVC insertion was done in the control group. Results: Out of 112 enrolled neonates, 58 were in the USG-guided group and 54 in the blind group. There was no significant difference in the failure rate between the intervention and control groups (20% versus 29% [RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.36-1.33]). The sensitivity and specificity of USG in locating tip position were 97 and 46.8%, respectively. The mean procedure time in USG and blind groups was 8.9 and 8.3 min, respectively ( Conclusion: USG does not reduce the failure rates during the insertion of umbilical catheters. However, being a safe, noninvasive procedure, it can be considered a rescue modality to CXR in NICUs equipped with portable USG for guiding UVC insertion.
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.