Zawadka Mateusz, La Via Luigi, Wong Adrian, Olusanya Olusegun, Muscarà Liliana, Continella Carlotta, Andruszkiewicz Pawel, Sanfilippo Filippo
2nd Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.
Department of Critical Care, King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Crit Care Med. 2023 May 1;51(5):642-652. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005819. Epub 2023 Mar 2.
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of real-time dynamic ultrasound-guided subclavian vein cannulation as compared to landmark technique in adult patients.
PubMed and EMBASE until June 1, 2022, with the EMBASE search restricted to the last 5 years.
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the two techniques (real-time ultrasound-guided vs landmark) for subclavian vein cannulation. The primary outcomes were overall success rate and complication rate, whereas secondary outcomes included success at first attempt, number of attempts, and access time.
Independent extraction by two authors according to prespecified criteria.
After screening, six RCTs were included. Two further RCTs using a static ultrasound-guided approach and one prospective study were included in the sensitivity analyses. The results are presented in the form of risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. Real-time ultrasound guidance increased the overall success rate for subclavian vein cannulation as compared to landmark technique (RR = 1.14; [95% CI 1.06-1.23]; p = 0.0007; I2 = 55%; low certainty) and complication rates (RR = 0.32; [95% CI 0.22-0.47]; p < 0.00001; I2 = 0%; low certainty). Furthermore, ultrasound guidance increased the success rate at first attempt (RR = 1.32; [95% CI 1.14-1.54]; p = 0.0003; I2 = 0%; low certainty), reduced the total number of attempts (MD = -0.45 [95% CI -0.57 to -0.34]; p < 0.00001; I2 = 0%; low certainty), and access time (MD = -10.14 s; [95% CI -17.34 to -2.94]; p = 0.006; I2 = 77%; low certainty). The Trial Sequential Analyses on the investigated outcomes showed that the results were robust. The evidence for all outcomes was considered to be of low certainty.
Real-time ultrasound-guided subclavian vein cannulation is safer and more efficient than a landmark approach. The findings seem robust although the evidence of low certainty.
我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估在成年患者中,实时动态超声引导下锁骨下静脉置管与 landmark 技术相比的有效性。
截至2022年6月1日的 PubMed 和 EMBASE,EMBASE 的检索仅限于过去5年。
我们纳入了比较两种锁骨下静脉置管技术(实时超声引导与 landmark)的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局为总体成功率和并发症发生率,次要结局包括首次尝试成功、尝试次数和置管时间。
由两位作者根据预先设定的标准独立提取。
筛选后,纳入了6项RCT。敏感性分析纳入了另外2项采用静态超声引导方法的RCT和1项前瞻性研究。结果以风险比(RR)或平均差(MD)及95%置信区间的形式呈现。与 landmark 技术相比,实时超声引导提高了锁骨下静脉置管的总体成功率(RR = 1.14;[95%CI 1.06 - 1.23];p = 0.0007;I² = 55%;低确定性)和降低了并发症发生率(RR = 0.32;[95%CI 0.22 - 0.47];p < 0.00001;I² = 0%;低确定性)。此外,超声引导提高了首次尝试成功率(RR = 1.32;[95%CI 1.14 - 1.54];p = 0.0003;I² = 0%;低确定性),减少了尝试总次数(MD = -0.45 [95%CI -0.57至 -0.34];p < 0.00001;I² = 0%;低确定性)和置管时间(MD = -10.14秒;[95%CI -17.34至 -2.94];p = 0.006;I² = 77%;低确定性)。对所研究结局的序贯分析表明结果是稳健的。所有结局的证据被认为是低确定性的。
实时超声引导下锁骨下静脉置管比 landmark 方法更安全、更有效。尽管证据的确定性较低,但研究结果似乎是稳健的。