SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2026
Efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided infraclavicular axillary vein cannulation for centrally inserted central catheter placement in critically ill patients: systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2026. 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.
- Interpreting equivalence: methodological heterogeneity in ultrasound-guided central venous cannulation.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrasound (US) guided infraclavicular axillary vein (AXV) central venous catheterization is an emerging method for accessing central veins in critically ill patients. The efficacy and safety of the AXV catheterization remain unknown as compared to more commonly utilized central venous access sites. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe main objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of US-guided AXV cannulation with those of other central venous access sites around the upper thoracic aperture region in critically ill patients. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis. Three databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus) were screened from inception until 1 July 2025 using a predefined search key and inclusion criteria (PROSPERO registration number CRD420251116432). The primary analysis included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AXV and internal jugular vein (IJV) cannulation. First-pass and overall success rate were evaluated as efficacy outcomes and mechanical complications (separately and cumulatively) as safety outcomes. Two researchers independently screened and extracted data using prespecified criteria. A random-effects inverse variance meta-analysis model was used. Risk of bias and grade of evidence were assessed using the ROB-2 tool and the GRADE approach, respectively.
resultsThe primary analysis included 908 patients from three RCTs which examined US-guided AXV versus US-guided IJV cannulation. There were no significant differences in overall cannulation success rate (RR = 0.98 (99% CI: 0.95–1.02, p=.16, I2 = 28%)), high certainty) and there was a trend toward lower first pass success rate in the AXV group (RR = 0.93 (99% CI: 0.88-1.00, p=.008, I2 = 0%, high certainty)). This effect was negligible after alternative testing and evaluation of trail sequential analysis (TSA). We found no differences in terms of the cumulative mechanical complication rate (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.69–1.61, p=.81, I2 = 0%, moderate certainty). The TSA revealed the equivalence of AXV to the IJV cannulation in terms of both efficacy and safety. The optimal information size for both aspects was achieved in the TSA.
conclusionsIn critically ill patients, US-guided infraclavicular AXV cannulation is equally effective and safe as US-guided IJV cannulation. REVIEW REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered prior its commencement in the PROSPERO database (CRD420251116432).
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.