K. Kumar, A. Khuwaja, A. Mangi, S. A. Khan, Hamna Tariq, Sayed Zaheeruddin, Saleha Akhtar
{"title":"A Prospective Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Versus Palpation Method for Radial Artery Catheter Placement","authors":"K. Kumar, A. Khuwaja, A. Mangi, S. A. Khan, Hamna Tariq, Sayed Zaheeruddin, Saleha Akhtar","doi":"10.47144/phj.v56i1.2414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of ultrasound guided vs. conventional palpation method for radial artery cannulation in the operating room for patients undergoing elective open-heart operations.\nMethodology: This prospective observational study was carried at the National Institute of Cardiovascular Disease (NICVD) in Karachi and Sukkur. All cannulation procedures were performed by anesthesia residents (R-1). Two equal sized independent groups of patients based on radial artery cannulation technique, either ultrasound guided (USG) or conventional palpation method (CPM) were recruited. Artery cannulation success along with number of attempts, total duration, number of additional operators, need for change of site, and complications were recorded.\nResults: A total of 70 patients were recruited in each of the group, mean patient age was 52.43±13.53 years vs. 50.71 ± 14.1 years; p=0.605 with proportion of male patients as 65.7% (46) vs. 77.1% (54); p=0.290, for USG and CPM, respectively. Artery cannulation success rate was 74.3% (52) vs. 80% (56); p=0.569, mean number of attempts was 1.71±1.05 vs. 1.51±0.89; p=0.391, mean total duration was 7.76±3.78 minutes vs. 5.42 ± 8.2 minutes; p=0.131, mean number of additional operators was 0.74±0.44 vs. 0.89±0.32; p=0.128, need for change of site was 11.4% (8) vs. 2.9% (2); p=0.356, and complications were observed in 8.6% (6) vs. 2.9% (2); p=0.614 for USG and CPM, respectively.\nConclusion: In this observational study, no significant differences were observed in the effectiveness of USG and CPM for radial artery cannulation when performed by newly inducted anesthesia residents.","PeriodicalId":42273,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Heart Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47144/phj.v56i1.2414","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of ultrasound guided vs. conventional palpation method for radial artery cannulation in the operating room for patients undergoing elective open-heart operations.
Methodology: This prospective observational study was carried at the National Institute of Cardiovascular Disease (NICVD) in Karachi and Sukkur. All cannulation procedures were performed by anesthesia residents (R-1). Two equal sized independent groups of patients based on radial artery cannulation technique, either ultrasound guided (USG) or conventional palpation method (CPM) were recruited. Artery cannulation success along with number of attempts, total duration, number of additional operators, need for change of site, and complications were recorded.
Results: A total of 70 patients were recruited in each of the group, mean patient age was 52.43±13.53 years vs. 50.71 ± 14.1 years; p=0.605 with proportion of male patients as 65.7% (46) vs. 77.1% (54); p=0.290, for USG and CPM, respectively. Artery cannulation success rate was 74.3% (52) vs. 80% (56); p=0.569, mean number of attempts was 1.71±1.05 vs. 1.51±0.89; p=0.391, mean total duration was 7.76±3.78 minutes vs. 5.42 ± 8.2 minutes; p=0.131, mean number of additional operators was 0.74±0.44 vs. 0.89±0.32; p=0.128, need for change of site was 11.4% (8) vs. 2.9% (2); p=0.356, and complications were observed in 8.6% (6) vs. 2.9% (2); p=0.614 for USG and CPM, respectively.
Conclusion: In this observational study, no significant differences were observed in the effectiveness of USG and CPM for radial artery cannulation when performed by newly inducted anesthesia residents.
目的:本研究的目的是评估超声引导与常规触诊方法在择期心内直视手术患者桡动脉插管的有效性。方法:这项前瞻性观察性研究在卡拉奇和苏库尔的国家心血管疾病研究所(NICVD)进行。所有插管过程均由麻醉住院医师(R-1)执行。采用超声引导(USG)和常规触诊(CPM)两种方法进行桡动脉插管技术,两组患者大小相等。记录动脉插管成功率、尝试次数、总持续时间、额外操作人员数量、更换位置的需要以及并发症。结果:两组共纳入患者70例,患者平均年龄分别为52.43±13.53岁和50.71±14.1岁;P =0.605,男性患者比例为65.7%(46例)比77.1%(54例);USG和CPM的p=0.290。动脉插管成功率74.3%(52例)vs. 80%(56例);P =0.569,平均尝试次数为1.71±1.05∶1.51±0.89;P =0.391,平均总病程为7.76±3.78 min vs 5.42±8.2 min;P =0.131,平均增加手术人数为0.74±0.44 vs 0.89±0.32;P =0.128,需要更换部位的患者分别为11.4%(8人)和2.9%(2人);P =0.356,并发症发生率为8.6%(6)比2.9% (2);USG和CPM的p=0.614。结论:在本观察性研究中,USG和CPM对新入局住院医师桡动脉插管的有效性无显著差异。