Gawda Ryszard, Marszalski Maciej, Piwoda Maciej, Molsa Maciej, Pietka Marek, Filipiak Kamil, Miechowicz Izabela, Czarnik Tomasz
Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Opole, Opole, Poland.
Department of Anesthesiology, Medical Center in Brzeg, Brzeg, Poland.
Crit Care Med. 2024 Jan 1;52(1):44-53. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006015. Epub 2023 Aug 7.
To examine whether an ultrasound-guided infraclavicular cannulation of the axillary artery is noninferior to an ultrasound-guided cannulation of the common femoral artery for arterial catheter placement in critically ill patients.
Prospective, investigator-initiated, noninferiority randomized controlled trial.
University-affiliated ICU in Poland.
Mechanically ventilated patients with indications for arterial catheter placement.
Patients were randomly assigned into two groups. In the axillary group (A group), an ultrasound-guided infraclavicular, in-plane cannulation of the axillary artery was performed. In the femoral group (F group), an ultrasound-guided, out-of-plane cannulation of the common femoral artery was performed.
A total of 1,079 mechanically ventilated patients were screened, of whom 110 were randomized. The main outcome was the cannulation success rate. The secondary outcomes included the artery puncture success rate, the first-pass success rate, number of attempts required to puncture, and the rate of early mechanical complications. The cannulation success rate in the A group and F group was 96.4% and 96.3%, respectively. The lower limit of 95% CI for the difference in cannulation success rate was above the prespecified noninferiority margin of-7% demonstrating noninferiority of infraclavicular approach. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of puncture success rate and the rate of early mechanical complications.
An ultrasound-guided infraclavicular cannulation of the axillary artery is noninferior to the cannulation of the common femoral artery in terms of procedure success rate. We found no significant differences in early mechanical complications between the groups.
探讨在危重症患者中,超声引导下锁骨下腋动脉置管与超声引导下股总动脉置管用于动脉导管置入是否非劣效。
前瞻性、研究者发起的非劣效随机对照试验。
波兰一所大学附属医院的重症监护病房。
有动脉导管置入指征的机械通气患者。
患者被随机分为两组。腋动脉组(A组)采用超声引导下锁骨下平面内腋动脉置管。股动脉组(F组)采用超声引导下股总动脉平面外置管。
共筛查了1079例机械通气患者,其中110例被随机分组。主要结局是置管成功率。次要结局包括动脉穿刺成功率、首次穿刺成功率、穿刺所需尝试次数以及早期机械并发症发生率。A组和F组的置管成功率分别为96.4%和96.3%。置管成功率差异的95%CI下限高于预先设定的非劣效界值-7%,表明锁骨下途径非劣效。两组在穿刺成功率和早期机械并发症发生率方面无显著差异。
超声引导下锁骨下腋动脉置管在操作成功率方面不劣于股总动脉置管。我们发现两组在早期机械并发症方面无显著差异。