Trial reportJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2026
A Novel Anchoring Catheter Improves the Success, Efficiency, and Satisfaction of Paracentesis in Refractory Ascites: A Multicenter Randomized Crossover Trial.
Trial report in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05578573 (Comparison of Success Rate and Complication Between Conventional Angiocatheter Versus New Anchoring Device), which is not on this 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.
Comparison of Success Rate and Complication Between Conventional Angiocatheter Versus New Anchoring Device (KARAHOC) Used for Paracentesis in Cirrhotic Patients With Ascites
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLarge-volume paracentesis is the standard treatment for refractory ascites, but conventional angiocatheter (CA) use may be limited by kinking and dislodgement. KARAHOC (KH) is a multifenestrated over-the-needle catheter with an anchoring disc designed to improve catheter stability. We compared the efficacy and safety of KH with CA in cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites.
methodsThis prospective, multicenter, 2 × 2 randomized crossover trial enrolled 87 cirrhotic patients requiring repeated paracentesis at three Korean academic hospitals. Participants underwent paracentesis with both KH and CA in randomized order at least 7 days apart. Successful paracentesis was defined as drainage of ≥ 3 L of ascites. Patient and operator satisfaction were assessed using a visual analog scale.
resultsIn the intention-to-treat analysis, success was higher with KH than with CA (87.5% vs. 71.6%; OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.22-6.30; p = 0.018), with shorter median procedure time (71 vs. 80 min; p = 0.018). Per-protocol analysis showed similar results (91.9% vs. 77.0%; p = 0.015). Re-puncture was less frequent with KH but was not statistically significant. Patient and operator satisfaction were significantly higher with KH (both p < 0.001). Adverse events were comparable, with no major complications.
conclusionKH improved paracentesis success, shortened procedure time, and increased satisfaction without compromising safety, supporting its use as a practical alternative to CA for repeated paracentesis in refractory ascites.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05578573.
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.