SynthesisNeonatology2026
Devices for Neonatal Peripheral Catheterization and Tip Confirmation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Neonatology, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
<p>Introduction: Peripheral intravenous catheterization is commonly required in sick neonates but remains challenging due to small vessels, leading to multiple attempts and complications. This review evaluated the benefits and harms of device-assisted techniques versus standard technique.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Cochrane Reviews, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov (October 2024) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data collection and analysis followed Cochrane methodology.
resultsWe included 12 RCTs (1,251 neonates). Devices were used for placement in 5 studies (417 neonates) and tip confirmation in 6 studies (740 neonates). One study used ultrasound for both PICC placement and tip confirmation (94 neonates). Devices may increase first-attempt success compared to standard technique: risk ratio (RR): 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-1.33 for placement and RR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.10-1.30 for tip confirmation. Six studies (528 neonates) reported a shorter time to successful catheterization. Devices likely reduce hematoma (RR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.13-0.75), bleeding (MD: -0.68, 95% CI: -0.83 to -0.53), and phlebitis (RR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.06-0.58). Evidence was of very low certainty for thrombosis for placement (RR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.01-7.99) and tip confirmation (RR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.05-1.16), catheter-related bloodstream infection (RR: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.34-4.58), and arrhythmia (RR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.70).
conclusionDevice-assisted catheterization may improve first-attempt success and reduce procedure time in neonates. Evidence on safety is limited. Due to variability in study methodologies and outcome reporting, high-quality RCTs with standardized outcome measures are needed. </p>.
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.