ArticleAcute and critical care2026
Bedside peripherally inserted central catheter placement in trauma intensive care unit in South Korea: a comparative analysis of safety and tip positioning accuracy.
Article in Acute and critical care, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTransporting critically ill trauma patients for fluoroscopy-guided peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) placement poses substantial risks. This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of bedside PICC insertion using a surface anatomical landmark-based measurement in a trauma intensive care unit (ICU).
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included trauma ICU patients who underwent PICC insertion between September 2023 and August 2024 at a regional trauma center. Insertion location was categorized as bedside or fluoroscopy-guided. Outcomes included optimal tip positioning, aberrant-course malposition, complication rates, and catheter dwell time. Multivariable linear regression identified factors associated with PICC duration.
resultsAmong 282 PICC procedures (171 bedside, 111 fluoroscopy), the bedside group had significantly higher injury severity scores and more frequent mechanical ventilation. Using the cmbased carina-distance criterion, optimal tip positioning was achieved in 73.1% of bedside and 65.5% of evaluable fluoroscopy-guided insertions (P=0.184). However, using the vertebral body unit-based radiologic criterion, target-zone achievement was lower in the bedside group than in the fluoroscopy group (48.5% vs. 64.9%). Initial aberrant-course malposition occurred in nine bedside insertions (5.3%) and in no fluoroscopy-guided insertions, and all were corrected before clinical use. Overall complication rates were comparable (17.5% vs. 18.0%, P=0.919).
conclusionsBedside PICC insertion using a surface anatomical measurement method may be a feasible transport-free option for selected critically ill trauma ICU patients.
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.