Let the resident try: Evaluation of central venous catheter placement in patients with hypotensive trauma using trauma video review

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2025.109215
Ryan P. Dumas MD , Bahaa Succar MD , Michael A. Vella MD MBA , Amelia Maiga MD MPH , Daniel N. Holena MD MSCE
{"title":"Let the resident try: Evaluation of central venous catheter placement in patients with hypotensive trauma using trauma video review","authors":"Ryan P. Dumas MD ,&nbsp;Bahaa Succar MD ,&nbsp;Michael A. Vella MD MBA ,&nbsp;Amelia Maiga MD MPH ,&nbsp;Daniel N. Holena MD MSCE","doi":"10.1016/j.surg.2025.109215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Intraosseous access has the greatest initial success rate in patients with hypotensive trauma and is significantly faster than central venous catheter access. However, central venous catheters play a critical role in the resuscitation of patients with hypotensive trauma. We sought to identify factors associated with successful placement of central venous catheter and hypothesized that attending surgeons would be more successful than trainees in the placement of central venous catheters.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We analyzed data abstracted from audiovisual recordings from a multicenter study of intravascular access in hypotensive (initial systolic blood pressure &lt;90 mm Hg) injured patients. The primary exposure of interest was practitioner type (attendings compared with trainees [residents/fellows]). The primary outcome of interest was central venous catheter access attempt success rate. We also examined success rates stratified by site of attempt (femoral compared with subclavian) and the association between attempt success and patient factors.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 242 central venous catheter access attempts occurred in 171 patients (median age, 38 years [interquartile range, 27–53], 84% male, Injury Severity Score of 26 [interquartile range, 17–41], initial systolic blood pressure 59 [interquartile range, 0–78] mm Hg) across 15 centers. Trainees performed 170 of 242 (70%) of central venous catheter attempts. Success did not differ between groups (attendings 60% vs trainees 59%, <em>P</em> = .96). Patient factors including age, sex, mechanism, and Injury Severity Score were not associated with central venous catheter success rates, but success rates were greater in patients with measurable systolic blood pressure (71% vs 45%, <em>P</em> &lt; .001). Attendings were more successful than trainees at subclavian attempts (66% vs 44%, <em>P</em> = .04).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>No significant difference was found in overall central venous catheter success rate by practitioner type, but attendings were more successful at subclavian lines, and, on average, approximately 1 minute faster. Patient condition and skill level should be considered when providing trainees with the opportunity to place central venous catheter in hypotensive patients, particularly at the subclavian location.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":22152,"journal":{"name":"Surgery","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 109215"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039606025000674","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Intraosseous access has the greatest initial success rate in patients with hypotensive trauma and is significantly faster than central venous catheter access. However, central venous catheters play a critical role in the resuscitation of patients with hypotensive trauma. We sought to identify factors associated with successful placement of central venous catheter and hypothesized that attending surgeons would be more successful than trainees in the placement of central venous catheters.

Methods

We analyzed data abstracted from audiovisual recordings from a multicenter study of intravascular access in hypotensive (initial systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg) injured patients. The primary exposure of interest was practitioner type (attendings compared with trainees [residents/fellows]). The primary outcome of interest was central venous catheter access attempt success rate. We also examined success rates stratified by site of attempt (femoral compared with subclavian) and the association between attempt success and patient factors.

Results

A total of 242 central venous catheter access attempts occurred in 171 patients (median age, 38 years [interquartile range, 27–53], 84% male, Injury Severity Score of 26 [interquartile range, 17–41], initial systolic blood pressure 59 [interquartile range, 0–78] mm Hg) across 15 centers. Trainees performed 170 of 242 (70%) of central venous catheter attempts. Success did not differ between groups (attendings 60% vs trainees 59%, P = .96). Patient factors including age, sex, mechanism, and Injury Severity Score were not associated with central venous catheter success rates, but success rates were greater in patients with measurable systolic blood pressure (71% vs 45%, P < .001). Attendings were more successful than trainees at subclavian attempts (66% vs 44%, P = .04).

Conclusion

No significant difference was found in overall central venous catheter success rate by practitioner type, but attendings were more successful at subclavian lines, and, on average, approximately 1 minute faster. Patient condition and skill level should be considered when providing trainees with the opportunity to place central venous catheter in hypotensive patients, particularly at the subclavian location.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Surgery
Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
687
审稿时长
64 days
期刊介绍: For 66 years, Surgery has published practical, authoritative information about procedures, clinical advances, and major trends shaping general surgery. Each issue features original scientific contributions and clinical reports. Peer-reviewed articles cover topics in oncology, trauma, gastrointestinal, vascular, and transplantation surgery. The journal also publishes papers from the meetings of its sponsoring societies, the Society of University Surgeons, the Central Surgical Association, and the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons.
期刊最新文献
Does luck always favor the prepared? Analysis of the NSQIP database shows benefits of combined bowel preparation on colostomy reversal outcomes Possibility of preventing intra-abdominal infection by lymph node mapping with indocyanine green in robotic gastrectomy Let the resident try: Evaluation of central venous catheter placement in patients with hypotensive trauma using trauma video review A trainee's perspective on the current state of diversity, equity, and inclusion Comprehensive assessment of 1-year postoperative venous thromboembolism and associated mortality risks in hepatopancreatobiliary cancer surgeries: A national survey
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1