We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
[Ultrasonography guided versus anatomically oriented puncture of the internal jugular vein for central venous catheterization].
Ultraschall in der Medizin 1999 June
AIM: Ultrasonography guided puncture (UGP) of the internal jugular vein (IJV) carried out by an expert is considered to be superior to the anatomically orientated puncture (AOP). Whether routine use of the UGP lowered the number of unsuccessful punctures and complications was unknown. Both puncture techniques were compared in a random study.
METHOD: Between 10/93 and 3/94, 77 patients who needed central venous catheterisation for thorax or cardiac surgery were included in the study. 84 (42 vs 42) punctures were performed by seven anesthetists, all of whom had a great deal of experience with AOP, using either one or the other technique. The UGP was demonstrated and assisted once by an expert. A conventional ultrasound unit with a 7.5 MHz transducer was used. The number of unsuccessful first punctures, overall rate of unsuccessful punctures, morbidity and puncture time were compared.
RESULTS: The unsuccessful first punctures using UGP occurred significantly less frequently (7 vs 19, p < 0.005). Fewer unsuccessful punctures were evidenced (9 vs 73, p < 0.001). One arterial puncture occurred with each of the puncture techniques. Five hematomas were observed in patients where AOP was used. Four of these patients were adipous and at least six unsuccessful punctures had already been carried out. The punctures lasted comparatively the same length of time (UGP: 59 s vs AOP: 60 s, p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: UGP is superior to AOP of the IJV also in routine use. It should be used more frequently in elective situations.
METHOD: Between 10/93 and 3/94, 77 patients who needed central venous catheterisation for thorax or cardiac surgery were included in the study. 84 (42 vs 42) punctures were performed by seven anesthetists, all of whom had a great deal of experience with AOP, using either one or the other technique. The UGP was demonstrated and assisted once by an expert. A conventional ultrasound unit with a 7.5 MHz transducer was used. The number of unsuccessful first punctures, overall rate of unsuccessful punctures, morbidity and puncture time were compared.
RESULTS: The unsuccessful first punctures using UGP occurred significantly less frequently (7 vs 19, p < 0.005). Fewer unsuccessful punctures were evidenced (9 vs 73, p < 0.001). One arterial puncture occurred with each of the puncture techniques. Five hematomas were observed in patients where AOP was used. Four of these patients were adipous and at least six unsuccessful punctures had already been carried out. The punctures lasted comparatively the same length of time (UGP: 59 s vs AOP: 60 s, p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: UGP is superior to AOP of the IJV also in routine use. It should be used more frequently in elective situations.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app