Ling Guo, Zhiwen Wang, Guorong Wang, Shaomei Shang, Xue Wu
Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Peking University School of Nursing, Beijing, China.
J Vasc Access. 2020 Sep;21(5):564-572. doi: 10.1177/1129729819868044. Epub 2019 Aug 17.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of guide wire electrode versus liquid electrode for intravascular electrocardiography-guided central venous catheter placement in adults.
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
We searched the main electronic databases (Cochrane Library, the Joanna Briggs Institute Library, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang) with articles published from inception up to March 2018. References of important articles were also screened for relevant studies. We used a structured search strategy and did not apply any search limitations.
Randomized, controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies or studies using a within-subject design, evaluating guide wire electrode versus liquid electrode for intravascular electrocardiography-guided central venous catheter placement in adults, were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.
In total, six studies with a total of 2176 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in accuracy of tip location placement between guide wire and liquid electrodes. Use of guide wire electrode had a higher risk of complications which were transient and there were an insufficient number of studies using the same parameters to evaluate intravascular electrocardiography signal quality.
Due to the small number and low quality of identified studies, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions on the relative effectiveness and safety of guide wire versus liquid electrodes for the placement of central venous catheters in adults. More well-designed studies are needed in the future.
评估导丝电极与液体电极在成人血管内心电图引导下中心静脉导管置入中的有效性和安全性。
系统评价和荟萃分析。
我们检索了主要电子数据库(Cochrane图书馆、乔安娜·布里格斯研究所图书馆、Embase、PubMed、CINAHL、中国知网和万方),纳入了自数据库建库至2018年3月发表的文章。还筛选了重要文章的参考文献以查找相关研究。我们采用结构化检索策略,未设置任何检索限制。
纳入随机对照试验、半实验性研究或采用自身对照设计的研究,这些研究评估了导丝电极与液体电极在成人血管内心电图引导下中心静脉导管置入中的应用。使用Cochrane协作网的工具进行偏倚风险评估,并使用RevMan 5.3进行荟萃分析。
共纳入6项研究,总计2176名参与者。荟萃分析表明,导丝电极和液体电极在尖端位置放置的准确性方面无统计学显著差异。使用导丝电极出现并发症的风险较高,且这些并发症为一过性,同时使用相同参数评估血管内心电图信号质量的研究数量不足。
由于已识别研究数量少且质量低,难以就导丝电极与液体电极在成人中心静脉导管置入中的相对有效性和安全性得出明确结论。未来需要更多设计良好的研究。