A comparison of two techniques of internal jugular vein cannulation: Landmark-guided technique versus ultrasound-guided technique

IF 0.1 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Marine Medical Society Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.4103/jmms.jmms_13_22
Josemine Davis, D. Dwivedi, Sadhan Sawhney, A. Rai, A. Dua, Satyen Singh
{"title":"A comparison of two techniques of internal jugular vein cannulation: Landmark-guided technique versus ultrasound-guided technique","authors":"Josemine Davis, D. Dwivedi, Sadhan Sawhney, A. Rai, A. Dua, Satyen Singh","doi":"10.4103/jmms.jmms_13_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study was designed to compare the overall success rates and complications of two techniques of internal jugular vein (IJV) catheterization, namely the landmark (LM)-based technique and ultrasound (US)-guided technique in a heterogeneous Indian population at an Armed Forces Tertiary Care Hospital. Methods: Ninety consenting patients were assigned to two groups: LM and US groups. Patients with known coagulation abnormalities, body mass index > 30, infection at the insertion site, known vascular abnormalities, burn contractures, and other dermatologic conditions that precluded an LM technique were excluded. Central venous catheterizations during the code blue scenarios were excluded due to the emergent nature of the procedure. Three operators from the author group with requisite experience in LM and US techniques performed the 90 catheterizations. In LM group, a finder needle with a 2 ml syringe was used to aspirate venous blood from the IJV. A 16G needle was guided in the same direction as the finder needle till venous blood was aspirated, followed by guidewire insertion and cannulation. In the US group, a 6–12 MHz linear US probe was used to identify the IJV in real time and a 16G needle was used to access the IJV under US guidance in the cross-sectional view. Results: The overall success rate was 84.4% in LM group and 100% in US group (P = 0.0059). The first attempt success rate was similar in both groups (71.1% and 86.6%, P = 0.07). The overall complication rates in LM group were 20%, whereas complications in the US group were 2.2% (P = 0.0073). Notably, vascular complications occurred less frequently in US group with fewer arterial punctures and hematomas. Hemothorax and pneumothorax did not occur in any group. The mean cannulation time decreased by 69 s, i.e., from 276 s in the LM group to 207 s in the US group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: US-guided central venous catheter insertion to IJV improves the overall success rate and reduces cannulation time as compared to conventional LM-based technique.","PeriodicalId":41773,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marine Medical Society","volume":"25 1","pages":"31 - 36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Marine Medical Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmms.jmms_13_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study was designed to compare the overall success rates and complications of two techniques of internal jugular vein (IJV) catheterization, namely the landmark (LM)-based technique and ultrasound (US)-guided technique in a heterogeneous Indian population at an Armed Forces Tertiary Care Hospital. Methods: Ninety consenting patients were assigned to two groups: LM and US groups. Patients with known coagulation abnormalities, body mass index > 30, infection at the insertion site, known vascular abnormalities, burn contractures, and other dermatologic conditions that precluded an LM technique were excluded. Central venous catheterizations during the code blue scenarios were excluded due to the emergent nature of the procedure. Three operators from the author group with requisite experience in LM and US techniques performed the 90 catheterizations. In LM group, a finder needle with a 2 ml syringe was used to aspirate venous blood from the IJV. A 16G needle was guided in the same direction as the finder needle till venous blood was aspirated, followed by guidewire insertion and cannulation. In the US group, a 6–12 MHz linear US probe was used to identify the IJV in real time and a 16G needle was used to access the IJV under US guidance in the cross-sectional view. Results: The overall success rate was 84.4% in LM group and 100% in US group (P = 0.0059). The first attempt success rate was similar in both groups (71.1% and 86.6%, P = 0.07). The overall complication rates in LM group were 20%, whereas complications in the US group were 2.2% (P = 0.0073). Notably, vascular complications occurred less frequently in US group with fewer arterial punctures and hematomas. Hemothorax and pneumothorax did not occur in any group. The mean cannulation time decreased by 69 s, i.e., from 276 s in the LM group to 207 s in the US group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: US-guided central venous catheter insertion to IJV improves the overall success rate and reduces cannulation time as compared to conventional LM-based technique.
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
颈内静脉置管两种技术的比较:标志引导技术与超声引导技术
背景:本研究旨在比较两种颈内静脉(IJV)置管技术的总体成功率和并发症,即基于路标(LM)的技术和超声(US)引导的技术,在武装部队三级护理医院的异质印度人群中。方法:90例同意的患者分为两组:LM组和US组。排除了已知凝血异常、体重指数bbb30、插入部位感染、已知血管异常、烧伤挛缩和其他妨碍LM技术的皮肤病患者。由于手术的紧急性质,在蓝色代码场景中排除了中心静脉导管。来自作者组的三名具有LM和US技术必要经验的操作员进行了90次导管置入。LM组用查找针加2 ml注射器从IJV抽吸静脉血。将16G针与查找针方向一致引导至静脉血抽吸完毕后,插入导丝插管。在US组中,使用6-12 MHz线性US探头实时识别IJV,并在横断面视图中使用16G针头在US引导下进入IJV。结果:LM组总成功率84.4%,US组总成功率100% (P = 0.0059)。两组首次尝试成功率相近,分别为71.1%和86.6%,P = 0.07。LM组总并发症发生率为20%,而US组总并发症发生率为2.2% (P = 0.0073)。值得注意的是,US组血管并发症发生率较低,动脉穿刺和血肿较少。两组均未发生血胸、气胸。平均插管时间减少69 s,即从LM组的276 s减少到US组的207 s (P < 0.001)。结论:与传统的基于lm的技术相比,us引导中心静脉导管置入IJV提高了整体成功率,缩短了插管时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Marine Medical Society
Journal of Marine Medical Society PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
70
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊最新文献
Psychological Morbidity of the COVID-19 Second Wave in Health-care Workers: A Cross-sectional Online Survey Adult Acne: Its Response to Therapy Sarcoidosis and Smoking: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Single Anesthesia ERCP and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Management of Common Bile Duct Stones Evolution and Innovations in Surgical Residency Education among Global Health Challenges
×
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