ReviewEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Ultrasound-guided central venous access in the NICU: indications, insertion and management.
Review in European journal of pediatrics, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultrasound-guided cannulation of deep veins has advanced in little more than a decade from the operating room to the neonatal bedside and from a rescue maneuver to a planned procedure. Centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs) and femorally inserted central catheters (FICCs) are quite different from epicutaneo-cava catheters: they are 3-4 Fr power-injectable polyurethane catheters that are easy to tunnel, secured by subcutaneous anchorage, and suitable for blood transfusion, high-flow infusions, repeated blood sampling, and hemodynamic monitoring. This narrative review examines the indications, materials, insertion bundles for CICCs and FICCs in newborns, as well as their management, complications, and the training gap that now limits their diffusion more than any technical obstacle. In published studies, procedural success is 97-100%, immediate complications are absent or rare (when an insertion bundle is used), and the bloodstream infection rate is severalfold lower in infants below 1,500 g and below 1,000 g compared with the epicutaneo-cava catheter. Since the evidence comes mainly from a few high-volume centers with high procedural expertise, the priority for future research is to define strategies - structured programs, simulation, proctoring - to build and maintain the same level of competence in lower-volume units.
conclusionThough the supporting evidence is observational, Ultrasound-guided CICCs (or FICCs, if in selected cases) appear to be the most appropriate central venous access for the critically ill newborn. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Ultrasound-guided CICCs and FICCs can be placed at the bedside in neonates, including extremely low birth weight infants, and outperform epicutaneo-cava catheters in safety, flow, dwell time, and range of use. • The adoption of insertion bundles reduces immediate and late complications of central venous catheterization in neonates and children. WHAT IS NEW: • Multicenter and comparative neonatal data show reproducible procedural success across centers and several-fold lower bloodstream infection rates in the smallest infants, compared with epicutaneo-cava catheters. • The limiting factor is no longer technical feasibility but structured training; tunneling remains the most frequently omitted step in the insertion bundle and the least easily replaced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42867694What 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.