Cochrane · systematic review · CD007119
Interventions for restoring patency of occluded central venous catheter lumens
van Miert, C, Hill, R, Jones, L · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2012 · Cochrane Library
Emergency and Critical CareAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
2
current version
GRADE rated
2
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 50%Low 1 · 50%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Urokinase (any strength) compared with placebo
Population: patients with occluded central venous catheter
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Restored patency Urokinase (any strength) vs placebo | RR 2.09 [1.47, 2.95] | 2 studies · 287 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse effects Urokinase (any strength) vs placebo | RR 2.88 [0.38, 21.93] | 1 study · 72 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |