ArticleWorld journal of emergency surgery : WJES2024
Exploring aortic morphology and determining variable-distance insertion lengths for fluoroscopy-free resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA).
Article in World journal of emergency surgery : WJES, 2024. 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.
- Transposing intensive care innovation from modern warfare to other resource-limited settings.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND (RATIONALE/PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE): Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is used to temporary control non-compressible truncal hemorrhage (NCTH) as bridge to definitive surgical treatment. The dependence on radiography for safe balloon positioning is one factor that limits the extended use of REBOA in civilian and military pre-hospital settings. We aimed to determine standardized sex and age-based variable-distance catheter insertion lengths for accurate REBOA placement without initial fluoroscopic confirmation.
methodsContrast enhanced CT-scans from a representative sample of a Dutch non-trauma population were retrospectively analyzed. Intravascular distances were measured from the bilateral common femoral artery access points (FAAP) to the middle of the aortic occlusion zones and accompanying boundaries. Means and 95% confidence intervals for the distances from the FAAPs to the boundaries and mid-zone III were calculated for all (combined) sex and age-based subgroups. Optimal insertion lengths and potentially safe regions were determined for these groups. Bootstrap analysis was performed in combination with a 40-mm long balloon introduction simulation to determine error-rates and REBOA placement accuracy for the general population.
resultsIn total, 1354 non-trauma patients (694 females) were included. Vascular distances increased with age and were longer in males. The iliofemoral trajectory was 7 mm longer on the right side. The optimal zone I catheter insertion length would be 430 mm. Optimal zone III catheter insertion lengths showed up to 30 mm difference, ranging between 234 and 264 mm. Statistically significant and potentially clinically relevant differences were observed between the anatomical distances and necessary introduction depths for each subgroup.
conclusionThis is the first study to compare aortic morphology and intravascular distances between combined sex and age-based subgroups. As zone III length was consistent, length variability and elongation seem to mainly originate in the iliofemoral trajectory and zone II. The optimal zone I catheter insertion length would be 430 mm. Optimal zone III catheter insertion ranged between 234 and 264 mm. These standardized variable-distance insertion lengths could facilitate safer fluoroscopy-free REBOA in austere, pre-hospital settings.
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.