Martin Matthew J, Husain Farah A, Piesman Michael, Mullenix Philip S, Steele Scott R, Andersen Charles A, Giacoppe George N
Department of Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington 98431, USA.
Curr Surg. 2004 Jan-Feb;61(1):71-4. doi: 10.1016/j.cursur.2003.07.010.
Portable ultrasound devices have become more readily available in the intensive care unit setting, but their utility outside of controlled trials remains unproven. We sought to determine how the availability of ultrasound guidance affected the types and number of complications during central line placement.
Review of a prospectively maintained database in a 20-bed combined intensive care unit. Procedure notes from all attempts at internal jugular vein access from 1996 to 2001 were recorded, and selected patient records were reviewed. Ultrasound guidance was available beginning in March 1998.
From 1996 to 2001, there were 484 documented attempts at internal jugular central line placement. Most procedures (83%) were performed by first- or second-year residents. During this period, there were 47 complications for an overall complication rate of 10%. These included 1 pneumothorax (2%), 6 carotid punctures (13%), 2 hematomas (4%), and 34 unsuccessful attempts (72%). There was no significant difference in age, sex, body-mass index, or intubation status between those with and without complications or between the ultrasound and anatomic landmark groups. Ultrasound was used in 179 (37%) attempts. The overall complication rate with ultrasound was 11% versus 9% using anatomic landmarks (p = NS). The complication rate prior to the availability of ultrasound was 15 of 114 attempts (13%) versus 32 of 370 attempts (9%) after the introduction of ultrasound in our intensive care unit (p = NS). Analysis of the 370 procedures performed since ultrasound became available demonstrated a complication rate of 11% with ultrasound guidance versus 6% without (p = 0.09). There was no significant difference in complication rates by resident year group or department (surgery vs. other). However, procedures performed after-hours (1800 to 0800) were associated with a 15% complication rate versus 6% for procedures performed during the workday (p < 0.05).
The availability and use of ultrasound guidance for central line placement by junior residents has not resulted in an improvement in procedure-related complications. The complication profile was not affected by ultrasound use, patient factors, or resident year in training. There was a higher complication rate associated with procedures performed at night that may be caused by resident fatigue or unavailability of senior supervision.
便携式超声设备在重症监护病房中已变得更容易获得,但其在对照试验之外的效用仍未得到证实。我们试图确定超声引导的可用性如何影响中心静脉置管期间并发症的类型和数量。
回顾一个拥有20张床位的综合重症监护病房中前瞻性维护的数据库。记录了1996年至2001年所有尝试颈内静脉穿刺的操作记录,并对选定的患者记录进行了审查。超声引导从1998年3月开始可用。
1996年至2001年,有484次记录在案的颈内中心静脉置管尝试。大多数操作(83%)由第一年或第二年的住院医师进行。在此期间,有47例并发症,总体并发症发生率为10%。这些并发症包括1例气胸(2%)、6例颈动脉穿刺(13%)、2例血肿(4%)和34次穿刺失败(72%)。有并发症者与无并发症者之间、超声引导组与解剖标志组之间在年龄、性别、体重指数或插管状态方面无显著差异。179次(37%)尝试使用了超声。超声引导下的总体并发症发生率为11%,而使用解剖标志时为9%(p=无显著性差异)。在我们重症监护病房引入超声之前,114次尝试中有15次(13%)发生并发症,引入超声后370次尝试中有32次(9%)发生并发症(p=无显著性差异)。对自超声可用以来进行的370例操作的分析表明,超声引导下的并发症发生率为11%,无超声引导时为6%(p=0.09)。住院医师年份组或科室(外科与其他科室)的并发症发生率无显著差异。然而,非工作时间(18:00至08:00)进行的操作并发症发生率为15%,而工作日进行的操作并发症发生率为6%(p<0.05)。
初级住院医师在中心静脉置管时使用超声引导并未改善与操作相关的并发症。并发症情况不受超声使用、患者因素或住院医师培训年份的影响。夜间进行的操作并发症发生率较高,可能是由于住院医师疲劳或缺乏上级监督所致。