ArticleTrials2026
IBP-DISTAL protocol: distal vs radial access for invasive BP in critical care.
Article in Trials, 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
34 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo determine whether distal radial artery (dTRA) cannulation is non-inferior to conventional radial artery (TRA) cannulation for first-pass success and subsequent safety and accuracy of invasive blood pressure monitoring in awake, critically ill adults.
designProspective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial.
methodsThe study will be conducted in three tertiary hospitals in northwestern China. Eligible patients (≥ 18 years old) requiring invasive arterial pressure monitoring, with palpable distal and proximal radial pulses and a negative modified Allen test, will be centrally randomized (1:1; stratified by previous ipsilateral intervention) to dTRA or TRA. Both groups will undergo blind puncture with a uniform 20 G catheter-over-needle system; ultrasound is reserved for rescue. Pre-procedure ultrasound maps vessel diameter, intima-media thickness and flow velocity. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: one-time success rate of catheterization. Secondary endpoints: total cannulation time, crossover rate, 24 h and 30-day radial artery occlusion (RAO) by Doppler, local complications (EASY hematoma grade), BARC major bleeding (types 2, 3, 5), accidental dislodgment, pain (VAS 0-10), functional score (Barthel Index), and major adverse cardiovascular/cerebrovascular events during ICU stay. Target enrollment 204 (102 per arm) gives 85% power to demonstrate non-inferiority at one-sided α = 0.025, allowing 20% failure rate. All ultrasound assessments are performed by technicians blinded to allocation. DISCUSSION: This nurse-led protocol reflects real-world Chinese practice (blind puncture, no ultrasound routine) while standardizing compression (≥ 5 min) and post-procedural care across centers. Results will clarify whether dTRA offers shorter hemostasis time, lower RAO and better comfort without compromising hemodynamic monitoring fidelity. IMPACT: If non-inferiority is confirmed, dTRA could become the preferred default access for invasive blood pressure monitoring in critical care, preserving future radial conduit and improving patient experience.
trial registrationThis study has been registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR.org.cn) under the identifier ChiCTR2500101331 (Apr 23, 2025).
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.