ArticleRenal failure2025
Comparison of the patency rates of catheter placement
Article in Renal failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study is to compare the patency rates of catheter placement
methodWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 30 patients admitted to our department due to TCC loss. Among them, 11 patients underwent catheter reinsertion
resultsIn both groups of patients, there were no cases of pneumothorax, severe adjacent artery injury, or mediastinal hematoma observed. The one-year primary patency rates of the catheters in the EVJ group and the BCV group were 54.55% and 36.84%, and the primary patency rates of two years were found to be 27.27% and 21.05% respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the patency rates at both 1 and 2 years (
conclusionIn the face of patients experiencing TCC loss, the practice of replacing dialysis catheters via the right EJV and right BCV routes emerges as a safe and efficacious alternative strategy. Notably, no difference in catheter patency rates is observed between these divergent access routes.
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.