ArticleScientific reports2024
One-hand guidewire introducer kit for ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization: a proof-of-concept study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 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
- Haptic Portable Robotic Device for Automated Guidewire or Catheter Navigation in Endovascular Procedures.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Superior vena cava perforation after central venous catheterization: the diagnostic role of progressive CVP elevation in occult injury-a case report.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- HAPTIC PORTABLE ROBOTIC DEVICE FOR AUTOMATED GUIDEWIRE OR CATHETER NAVIGATION IN ENDOVASCULAR PROCEDURES.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Clinical Efficacy of Ultrasound Guidance in Brachial Plexus Nerve Conduction Study: A Comparative Analysis.Current medical imaging · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterization (CVC), the first-attempt success rate has remained around 52.6-62.1%. A significant reason is that the needle can sometimes be dislodged from the punctured vein during hand shifts. Here, a novel one-hand guidewire introducer (OGI) kit was developed to perform guidewire insertion in the central vein, eliminating hand shifts. To establish a protocol, the OGI kit was validated using a central line training phantom. A total of 48 randomized trials of guidewire insertion in the internal jugular vein in eight pigs were performed using either the conventional kit (group A) or the OGI kit (group B). All trials were technically successful with all eight pigs. First-attempt success rate (50% vs. 75%, p = 0.035) and global rating scale (12 (5-15) vs. 14 (8-15), p = 0.011) were significantly lower in group A than in group B. The number of needle redirections and guidewire insertions, time to guidewire insertion, and procedure-related complications were significantly higher in group A than in group B. Guidewire insertion using a novel OGI kit could be a promising approach for real-time ultrasound-guided CVC as it offers greater clinical usefulness.
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.