Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 543

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ultrasound-assisted cannulation of the internal jugular vein. A prospective comparison to the external landmark-guided technique.

Denys, B G, Uretsky, B F, Reddy, P S·1993·Circulation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Central venous access is an essential part of patient management in many clinical settings and is usually achieved with a blinded, external landmark-guided technique. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether an ultrasound technique can improve on the traditional method. METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively evaluated an ultrasound-guided method in 302 patients undergoing internal jugular venous cannulation and compared the results with 302 patients in whom an external landmark-guided technique was used. Ultrasound was used exclusively in an additional 626 patients. Cannulation of the internal jugular vein was achieved in all patients (100%) using ultrasound and in 266 patients (88.1%) using the landmark-guided technique (p < 0.001). The vein was entered on the first attempt in 78% of patients using ultrasound and in 38% using the landmark technique (p < 0.001). Average access time (skin to vein) was 9.8 seconds (2-68 seconds) by the ultrasound approach and 44.5 seconds (2-1,000 seconds) by the landmark approach (p < 0.001). Using ultrasound, puncture of the carotid artery occurred in 1.7% of patients, brachial plexus irritation in 0.4%, and hematoma in 0.2%. In the external landmark group, puncture of the carotid artery occurred in 8.3% of patients (p < 0.001), brachial plexus irritation in 1.7% (p < 0.001), and hematoma in 3.3% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided cannulation of the internal jugular vein significantly improves success rate, decreases access time, and reduces complication rate. These results suggest that this technique may be preferred in complicated cases or when access problems are anticipated.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.87.5.1557

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 543

Metadata

Authors
Denys, B. G., Uretsky, B. F., & Reddy, P. S.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1993-05
Volume
87
Issue
5
Pages
1557-1562
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2091639018
Cited by
543
References
1
FWCI
15.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ultrasound-assisted cannulation of the internal jugular vein. A prospective comparison to the external landmark-guided technique. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.87.5.1557
The paper
Denys, B. G., Uretsky, B. F., & Reddy, P. S. (1993). Ultrasound-assisted cannulation of the internal jugular vein. A prospective comparison to the external landmark-guided technique. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.87.5.1557

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.