From the Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; and Department of Anesthesiology and The Perioperative Outcomes, INformatics, and Transfusion (POINT) Study Team, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Anesth Analg. 2014 Feb;118(2):288-295. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000082.
Although studies have compared safety and outcomes of radial artery cannulation with other arterial catheterization locations, there is insufficient information describing brachial artery catheterization. In this study, we characterized the perioperative use patterns and the complication rates associated with brachial arterial catheterization and compared these outcomes with radial artery catheterization.
We performed a retrospective analysis of adult patients (age ≥18 years) undergoing surgical procedures at an academic medical center from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2011. An institutional database containing information on anesthetic care was queried to identify all brachial artery catheterizations. Baseline characteristics, details relating to the surgical and catheterization procedures, and catheter-related complications were collected and compared with a random sample of patients receiving radial artery catheterization.
We identified 858 patients receiving brachial catheterization perioperatively. An additional 3432 patients receiving radial catheterization were identified. Patients receiving brachial catheterization were more often women, had a lower body mass index, had more comorbidities, and had longer anesthetic and catheterization durations. Three vascular complications were identified in the cohort receiving brachial artery catheterization compared with 1 patient with a peripheral neuropathy in the radial artery catheterization cohort (unadjusted complication incidence [95% confidence intervals] brachial artery catheterization, 0.35% [0.12%-1.02%] vs radial artery catheterization, 0.03% [0.005%-0.16%], respectively; P = 0.030; relative risk [95% confidence interval] = 12.0 [1.7-83.4]). There were no catheter-related bloodstream infections.
We found that brachial artery catheterization is used in more medically complex patients and for longer duration than radial artery catheterizations. Although the limited number of adverse outcomes precluded statistical adjustments in this investigation, the observed differences in complication rates between cannulation methods suggest that brachial artery catheterization may be a suitable alternative to radial artery catheterization in patients with complex medical comorbidities.
尽管已有研究比较了桡动脉插管与其他动脉置管部位的安全性和结果,但有关肱动脉置管的信息还不够充分。本研究旨在描述肱动脉置管的围手术期使用模式和相关并发症发生率,并将这些结果与桡动脉置管进行比较。
我们对 2008 年 1 月 1 日至 2011 年 12 月 31 日在一家学术医疗中心接受手术的成年患者(年龄≥18 岁)进行了回顾性分析。查询包含麻醉护理信息的机构数据库,以确定所有肱动脉置管病例。收集基线特征、手术和置管程序相关细节以及导管相关并发症,并与随机抽取的接受桡动脉置管的患者进行比较。
我们共确定了 858 例围手术期接受肱动脉置管的患者,另外还确定了 3432 例接受桡动脉置管的患者。与接受桡动脉置管的患者相比,接受肱动脉置管的患者中女性更多,体重指数更低,合并症更多,麻醉和置管时间更长。在接受肱动脉置管的患者中发现了 3 例血管并发症,而在接受桡动脉置管的患者中仅发现 1 例周围神经病变(未调整的并发症发生率[95%置信区间]肱动脉置管为 0.35%[0.12%-1.02%],桡动脉置管为 0.03%[0.005%-0.16%];P=0.030;相对风险[95%置信区间]为 12.0[1.7-83.4])。没有导管相关的血流感染。
我们发现,与桡动脉置管相比,肱动脉置管在更多的合并症较重的患者中使用,并且持续时间更长。尽管本研究中不良结局的数量有限,无法进行统计学调整,但两种置管方法之间的并发症发生率差异表明,在合并症复杂的患者中,肱动脉置管可能是桡动脉置管的合适替代方法。