Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 10:57 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-01 @ 5:20 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT04684069
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2020-12-28
First Post:
2020-12-21
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
"Syringe Free" Long-Axis In-Plane vs. Short-Axis Out-of-Plane Approach for Central Venous Catheter Placement
Sponsor:
Ataturk University
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
"Syringe Free" Long-Axis In-Plane vs. Short-Axis Out-of-Plane Approach for Ultrasound-Guided Central Venous Catheter Placement in Critically Ill Children: A Prospective Randomized Study
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2020-12
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Internal jugular, subclavian, or femoral veins are often used for central venous catheter (CVC) placement. Regardless of which vein is preferred, the "Seldinger" technique is used most frequently. The most commonly used method with ultrasound is the short-axis out-of-plane approach. The main problem in this method is that the correct needle tip is missed, and it causes some complications by causing posterior wall punctures. The "Syringe-free" technique is first reported by Matias et al. in adults; it is a technique that allows full real-time monitoring of the guidewire insertion into the vein without blood aspiration. It is a great advantage in CVC placement, especially with the long-axis in-plane approach. When the literature is reviewed, no study other than a 12 case study in which brachiocephalic vein catheterization related to CVC placement was performed using this technique in children was found. There is no randomized study comparing the "Syringe-free" Long-Axis In-Plane technique with the classic Short-Axis Out-of-Plane technique in pediatric patients.
This study compares these two techniques' efficacy and complication rates in critically ill children requiring CVC placement.
This study compares these two techniques' efficacy and complication rates in critically ill children requiring CVC placement.
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: