Stern W, Sauer W, Dauber W
Anatomisches Institut, Universität Tübingen, BRD.
Acta Anat (Basel). 1990;138(2):137-43.
For access to the central venous system numerous percutaneous methods and approaches exist. Questions are often raised concerning which approach is the safest. In 18 human cadavers, we punctured the internal jugular vein via an anterior and posterior approach and the subclavian vein via an infraclavicular route to determine which of these approaches is better with respect to success rate and frequency of puncture complications. The position of the needles was assessed by dissection. Successful venipunctures were achieved in 81% by the posterior approach, as opposed to 58% by the anterior approach and the infraclavicular route. The lowest frequency of complications was attained by the posterior approach (17%) too, whereas the anterior approach (33%) and the subclavian route (25%) had higher complication rates. The main complication of posterior and anterior approaches was inadvertent arterial puncture (9 vs. 19%). At the subclavian approach puncture of a 'wrong' vein was frequent (14%), and the complications included a case of pleura lesion. In conclusion the posterior approach to the internal jugular vein is superior to the other investigated approaches, and therefore, it can reasonably be proposed as a usual route for the insertion of a central venous catheter.
进入中心静脉系统有多种经皮方法和途径。人们常常会问哪种途径最安全。在18具人体尸体上,我们通过前后两种途径穿刺颈内静脉,并通过锁骨下途径穿刺锁骨下静脉,以确定哪种途径在成功率和穿刺并发症发生率方面更优。通过解剖评估针的位置。后路穿刺的成功率为81%,前路穿刺和锁骨下途径的成功率为58%。后路穿刺的并发症发生率也最低(17%),而前路穿刺(33%)和锁骨下途径(25%)的并发症发生率更高。后路和前路穿刺的主要并发症是意外动脉穿刺(分别为9%和19%)。在锁骨下途径中,穿刺“错误”静脉的情况很常见(14%),并发症包括1例胸膜损伤。总之,颈内静脉后路穿刺优于其他所研究的途径,因此,可以合理地建议将其作为插入中心静脉导管的常用途径。