Trial reportJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2025
Wire-in-needle versus conventional syringe-on-needle technique for ultrasound-guided central venous catheter insertion in the internal jugular vein: the WIN randomized trial.
Trial report in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A four-handed ultrasound-guided combined technique for central venous access in a high-risk patient.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2026Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere are different techniques for ultrasound-guided central venous catheter (CVC) insertion. When using the conventional syringe-on-needle technique, the syringe needs to be removed from the needle after venous puncture to pass the guidewire through the needle into the vein. When, alternatively, using the wire-in-needle technique, the needle is preloaded with the guidewire, and the guidewire-after venous puncture-is advanced into the vein under real-time ultrasound guidance. We tested the hypothesis that the wire-in-needle technique reduces the time to successful guidewire insertion in the internal jugular vein compared with the syringe-on-needle technique in adults.
methodsWe randomized 250 patients to the wire-in-needle or syringe-on-needle technique. Our primary endpoint was the time to successful guidewire insertion in the internal jugular vein.
resultsTwo hundred and thirty eight patients were analyzed. The median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) time to successful guidewire insertion was 22 (16, 38) s in patients assigned to the wire-in-needle technique and 25 (19, 34) s in patients assigned to the syringe-on-needle technique (estimated location shift: 2 s; 95%-confidence-interval: - 1 to 5 s, p = 0.165). CVC insertion was successful on the first attempt in 103/116 patients (89%) assigned to the wire-in-needle technique and in 113/122 patients (93%) assigned to the syringe-on-needle technique. CVC insertion-related complications occurred in 8/116 patients (7%) assigned to the wire-in-needle technique and 19/122 patients (16%) assigned to the syringe-on-needle technique.
conclusionThe wire-in-needle technique-compared with the syringe-on-needle technique-did not reduce the time to successful guidewire insertion in the internal jugular vein. Clinicians can consider either technique for ultrasound-guided CVC insertion in adults.
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.