ArticleAnesthesiology research and practice2026
A Comparison Between Two Different Directions of Landmark-Guided Femoral Vein Puncture: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Anesthesiology research and practice, 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.
- A Comparison Between Two Different Directions of Landmark-Guided Femoral Vein Puncture: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anatomic variations in the spatial relationship between the femoral vein and artery are recognized as predisposing factors for iatrogenic vascular injury during percutaneous procedures. There have been few clinical studies comparing different directions of femoral vein puncture. Here, we conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing two directions of femoral vein puncture. Methods: A cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous femoral venous catheterization was randomized into two groups of comparable size, with punctures executed via either the lateral or orthogonal approach. The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate. Secondary outcomes included overall success rate, number of puncture attempts, puncture time, and complications. Results: Among 108 patients, the lateral approach group demonstrated a higher first-attempt success rate (76% vs. 52%; risk difference: 24%, 95% CI: 6% to 40%; Conclusions: When relying on anatomical landmarks for femoral vein puncture, the lateral approach is conducive to improving the success rate and reducing operating time without raising the risk of local complications. This is particularly beneficial in cases where the femoral artery and vein partially or fully overlap.
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.