Suppr超能文献

中心静脉导管插入深度的床旁预测——不同技术的比较

Bedside prediction of the central venous catheter insertion depth - Comparison of different techniques.

作者信息

Jayaraman Jayaprakash, Shah Veena

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Smt. K. M. Mehta and Smt. G. R. Doshi Institute of Kidney Diseases and Research Center, Civil Hospital Campus, Dr. H. L. Trivedi Institute of Transplantation Sciences, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.

出版信息

J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2019 Apr-Jun;35(2):197-201. doi: 10.4103/joacp.JOACP_125_16.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Central venous catheterization is a frequently performed procedure in anesthesia and critical care, and is indispensable in the practice of emergency medicine. Correct positioning of the central venous catheter (CVC) tip is often regarded as a secondary goal and there are various complications that can occur due to abnormal position of the catheter tip. Different methods have been advocated to guide accurate prediction of optimal CVC depth insertion before or during the procedure at the bedside.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective randomized double blinded study was conducted in 180 patients aged between 18 to 65 years requiring central venous catheterization. The optimal depth of insertion of right internal jugular vein (IJV) catheter using three different techniques, Peres' formula method, Landmark technique and Intra atrial Electrocardiography (ECG) guided technique was performed and the three techniques were compared with respect to optimal positioning using carina as a landmark in post procedural chest radiograph. Correct position of the catheter tip was considered upto 1 cm above or below the carina in post procedure X ray.

RESULTS

The average final depth of insertion was 15.30 ± 0.62 cms in the Formula group, 12.74 ± 0.77 cms in landmark group and 12.64 ± 0.70 cms in ECG group. The vertical distance from carina was 0.91 ± 0.94 cms in formula group, 0.54 ± 0.67 cms in landmark group and 0.53 ± 0.43 cms in ECG group. The CVC tip was properly positioned within 1 cm above and below the carina in 58.33% patients in the formula group, 93.33% patients in landmark group and 96.67% patients in ECG group.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that both landmark guidance and ECG guidance are comparable with regard to accurate central venous catheter tip positioning when CVCs are placed through right internal jugular vein whereas formula based technique is least accurate and results in over insertion of CVCs.

摘要

背景与目的

中心静脉置管是麻醉和重症监护中经常进行的操作,在急诊医学实践中不可或缺。中心静脉导管(CVC)尖端的正确定位通常被视为次要目标,并且由于导管尖端位置异常可能会发生各种并发症。人们提倡采用不同的方法在床边操作前或操作过程中指导准确预测最佳CVC插入深度。

材料与方法

对180例年龄在18至65岁之间需要进行中心静脉置管的患者进行了一项前瞻性随机双盲研究。使用三种不同技术(佩雷斯公式法、体表标志技术和心房内心电图(ECG)引导技术)进行右颈内静脉(IJV)导管的最佳插入深度操作,并在术后胸部X线片上以隆突为标志比较这三种技术在最佳定位方面的情况。术后X线片显示导管尖端在隆突上方或下方1厘米以内被认为是正确位置。

结果

公式组的平均最终插入深度为15.30±0.62厘米,体表标志组为12.74±0.77厘米,心电图组为12.64±0.70厘米。公式组距隆突的垂直距离为0.91±0.94厘米,体表标志组为0.54±0.67厘米,心电图组为0.53±0.43厘米。公式组58.33%的患者、体表标志组93.33%的患者和心电图组96.67%的患者的CVC尖端在隆突上方和下方1厘米内正确定位。

结论

我们得出结论,当通过右颈内静脉放置CVC时,在准确的中心静脉导管尖端定位方面,体表标志引导和心电图引导具有可比性,而基于公式的技术最不准确,会导致CVC过度插入。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cff3/6598586/20d998425457/JOACP-35-197-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验