Padmanaban Ajay, Venkataraman Ramesh, Rajagopal Senthilkumar, Devaprasad Dedeepiya, Ramakrishnan Nagarajan
Apollo Hospitals Chennai, Chennai, India.
Apollo Cancer Hospitals, Chennai, India.
J Crit Care Med (Targu Mures). 2020 Nov 7;6(4):210-216. doi: 10.2478/jccm-2020-0030. eCollection 2020 Oct.
Vasopressors are conventionally administered through a central venous catheter (CVC) and not through a peripheral venous catheter (PVC) since the latter is believed to be associated with increased risk of extravasation. Placement of a CVC requires suitably trained personnel to be on hand, and in resource-limited settings, this requirement may delay placement. Because of this and in cases where suitably trained personnel are not immediately available, some clinicians may be prompted to utilise a PVC for infusing vasopressors. The objective of this study is to assess the feasibility and safety of vasopressors administered through a PVC.
Patients who received vasopressors through a PVC for more than one hour were included in a single centre, consecutive patient observational study. Patients with a CVC at the time of initiation of vasopressors were excluded. Data regarding the size, location of PVCs, dose, duration and number of vasopressors infused were recorded. The decision to place CVC was left to the discretion of the treating physician. Extravasation incidents, severity and management of such events were recorded.
One hundred twenty-two patients age 55(4) years [mean (SD)] were included in the study. The commonest PVC was of 18G calibre (57%), and the most common site of placement was the external jugular vein (36.5%). Noradrenaline was the most common vasopressor used at a dose of 10.6 (7) mcg/min [mean (SD)] and the median duration of nine hours (IQR: 6-14). CVC was placed most commonly due to an increasing dose of vasopressors after 4.5(4) hours [mean (SD)]. Grade 2 Extravasation injury occurred in one patient after prolonged infusion of fifty-two hours, through a small calibre (20G) PVC, which was managed conservatively without any sequelae.
Vasopressors infused through a PVC of 18G or larger calibre into the external jugular, or a forearm vein is feasible and safe. Clinicians need to balance the safety of peripheral vasopressor infusion with the additional costs and complications associated with CVC in resource-limited settings.
血管升压药传统上是通过中心静脉导管(CVC)给药,而非外周静脉导管(PVC),因为人们认为后者会增加外渗风险。放置CVC需要有经过适当培训的人员在场,而在资源有限的环境中,这一要求可能会延迟放置。因此,在没有立即获得经过适当培训人员的情况下,一些临床医生可能会被促使使用PVC来输注血管升压药。本研究的目的是评估通过PVC给药血管升压药的可行性和安全性。
在一项单中心、连续患者观察性研究中纳入了通过PVC接受血管升压药治疗超过1小时的患者。血管升压药开始使用时已置有CVC的患者被排除。记录有关PVC的尺寸、位置、剂量、持续时间以及输注的血管升压药数量的数据。是否放置CVC由主治医生自行决定。记录外渗事件、此类事件的严重程度及处理情况。
122例年龄为55(4)岁[均值(标准差)]的患者纳入研究。最常见的PVC为18G规格(57%),最常见的放置部位是颈外静脉(36.5%)。去甲肾上腺素是最常用的血管升压药,剂量为10.6(7)微克/分钟[均值(标准差)],中位持续时间为9小时(四分位间距:6 - 14)。最常见的情况是在4.5(4)小时[均值(标准差)]后因血管升压药剂量增加而放置CVC。一名患者在通过小规格(20G)PVC长时间输注52小时后发生2级外渗损伤,经保守处理后无任何后遗症。
通过18G或更大规格的PVC将血管升压药输注至颈外静脉或前臂静脉是可行且安全的。在资源有限的环境中,临床医生需要在外周血管升压药输注的安全性与CVC相关的额外费用及并发症之间进行权衡。