A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Comparative safety and efficacy of midline catheters versus long peripheral catheters in patients undergoing bariatric surgery: a randomised controlled trial. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Bariatric surgery is an effective treatment for moderate-to-severe obesity, however, reliable vascular access during the perioperative period remains a challenge in this population. This study compared the safety and efficacy of midline catheters (MCs) and long peripheral catheters (LPCs) in patients who underwent bariatric surgery. This single-blind, randomised controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary acute hospital between September 2023 and January 2024. A totol of 224 patients were assigned to receive either MC or LPC. The primary outcome was catheter failure; secondary outcomes included insertion attempts, time to insert the device, indwelling time, complications, requirements for additional vascular access devices, and patient satisfaction. The incidence of catheter failure was significantly lower in the MCs group (10.71%) than in the LPCs group (20.54%; odds ratio [OR] 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.99; P = 0.043). Additionally, MCs had longer median indwelling times (7 d vs. 5 d; P < 0.001), fewer complications (13.39% vs. 27.68%; OR 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P = 0.008), and required fewer additional devices (4.46% vs. 16.07%; OR 0.24; 95% CI, 0.09-0.68; P = 0.004). These findings suggest that MCs are a superior choice for vascular access devices in patients undergoing bariatric surgery.Trial registration: Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06031545 11/09/2023).

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12368232PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-12551-0DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bariatric surgery
12
safety efficacy
8
efficacy midline
8
midline catheters
8
long peripheral
8
peripheral catheters
8
randomised controlled
8
controlled trial
8
vascular access
8
catheter failure
8

Similar Publications