Observational studyScientific reports2024
Percutaneous ultrasound-guided versus open cut-down access to femoral vessels for the placement of a REBOA catheter.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2024. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- REBOA in trauma: a life-saving intervention or a spectacular failure?European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Review
- [Focus emergency medicine 2023/2024-Summary of selected studies in emergency medicine].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2024Review
- Emergency treatment of pelvic ring injuries: state of the art.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Review
- Aortoesophageal fistula with hemorrhagic shock successfully treated with resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta.International journal of emergency medicine · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) may be useful in treating exsanguinating trauma patients. This study seeks to compare rates of success, complications and time required for vascular access between ultrasound-guidance and surgical cut-down for femoral sheath insertion as a prospective observational case control study. Participating clinicians from either trauma surgery or anesthesiology were allocated to surgical cut-down or percutaneous ultrasound-guided puncture on a 1:1 ratio. Time spans to vessel identification, successful puncture, and balloon inflation were recorded. 80 study participants were recruited and allocated to 40 open cut-down approaches and 40 percutaneous ultrasound-guided approaches. REBOA catheter placement was successful in 18/40 cases (45%) using a percutaneous ultrasound guided technique and 33/40 times (83%) using the open cut-down approach (p < 0.001). Median times [in seconds] compared between percutaneous ultrasound-guided puncture and surgical cut-down were 36 (18-73) versus 117(56-213) for vessel visualization (p < 0.001), 136 (97-175) versus 183 (156-219) for vessel puncture (p < 0.001), and 375 (240-600) versus 288 (244-379) for balloon inflation (p = 0.08) overall. Access to femoral vessels for REBOA catheter placement is safer when performed by cut-down and direct visualization but can be performed faster by an ultrasound-guided technique when vessels can be identified clearly and rapidly.
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.