The methodology used in their study is based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis codes, linking them with outcomes of interest: in the thoracentesis cohort, pneumothorax and/or in the paracentesis cohort, bleeding complications (hemorrhage, hematoma, or hemoperitoneum). Briefly, the risk of pneumothorax was 3.09% in the group not receiving ultrasound guidance and 2.26% in the ultrasound group; for patients having paracentesis procedures, the risk of bleeding complications was 0.27% with ultrasound guidance and 1.25% without ultrasound. Nonetheless, the occurrence of these types of complications is exceedingly high in comparison with our personal experience. This can be due to the actual procedures and the devices used. Transducers with the parallel needle can guide only obliquely, angulated vs the ultrasound beam, causing, even with a lower frequency, the same complications of the blind punctures. The advantages of ultrasound-guided transthoracic thoracentesis,2 pericardiocentesis3,4 and abdominal paracentesis5 are related to the use of probes that have a central hole2,3 through which the needle set is introduced (Fig 1). By this device, which is the most suitable and reliable for these purposes and is available for most equipment, we can follow the needle at all times in its road, with an image exactly on the line of the target and the transducer, linear array, or convex.