Bahl Amit, Gibson S Matthew, Walton Alexis
Department of Emergency Medicine, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, MI, USA.
Vascular Access Consulting, Henderson, KY, USA.
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2024 Sep 4;20:559-566. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S479846. eCollection 2024.
Modifying the PIVC tip to direct infusates toward areas of highest hemodilution may reduce vein wall damage. This study compared flow patterns between a traditional PIVC with a central opening and one with an off-axis aperture.
This was an exploratory observational analysis conducted at a tertiary care emergency department (ED) comparing flow patterns of two intravenous catheters: PIVC 1 (2.95 cm 20 gauge [Autoguard, Becton Dickinson]) and PIVC 2 (3.68 cm 20 gauge [Osprey, SkyDance Vascular]). Adult ED patients with PIVCs placed via traditional palpation/visualization method and with ultrasound capturing the flushing were eligible participants. Ultrasounds were reviewed to determine vein, catheter, and flow characteristics. The primary outcome was angle of the infusate leaving the catheter. Secondary outcomes included direction of catheter tip against vein wall, distance away from vein wall, vasospasm, and laminar/turbulent flow.
Data from December 2023 included 28 catheters (10 PIVC 1, 18 PIVC 2). The average patient age was 53.7 years; 53.6% were female. Vein diameter/depth were similar: 0.35 cm/0.41 cm for PIVC 1 and 0.37 cm/0.47 cm for PIVC 2. The catheter tip pointed posteriorly towards the vein wall in 60% of PIVC 1 vs 11.1% in PIVC 2 (P=0.018). The angle of infusate flow away from the vein wall was 0.20° (SD 0.63) for PIVC 1 and 7.61° (SD 5.71) for PIVC 2 (P<0.001). Flow at 0° occurred in 90% of PIVC 1 vs 16.7% in PIVC 2 (P<0.001).
In this exploratory investigation, a peripheral vascular access device with an off-axis tip aperture of demonstrated a sharper infusate flow angle away from the vein wall compared to a traditional central opening device. This redirection may reduce vein wall trauma and complications, though further research is needed to pair clinical outcomes with this technology.
调整外周静脉留置针(PIVC)尖端,使输注液流向血液稀释程度最高的区域,可能会减少静脉壁损伤。本研究比较了传统中心开口PIVC与具有偏轴孔的PIVC之间的血流模式。
这是一项在三级护理急诊科进行的探索性观察分析,比较了两种静脉导管的血流模式:PIVC 1(2.95厘米,20G [自动防护型,贝克顿·迪金森公司])和PIVC 2(3.68厘米,20G [鱼鹰型,SkyDance血管公司])。通过传统触诊/可视化方法放置PIVC且超声记录冲洗过程的成年急诊科患者为合格参与者。回顾超声检查结果以确定静脉、导管和血流特征。主要结局是输注液离开导管的角度。次要结局包括导管尖端与静脉壁的方向、与静脉壁的距离、血管痉挛以及层流/湍流。
2023年12月的数据包括28根导管(10根PIVC 1,18根PIVC 2)。患者平均年龄为53.7岁;53.6%为女性。静脉直径/深度相似:PIVC 1为0.35厘米/0.41厘米,PIVC 2为0.37厘米/0.47厘米。60%的PIVC 1导管尖端向后指向静脉壁,而PIVC 2为11.1%(P = 0.018)。PIVC 1的输注液流离静脉壁的角度为0.20°(标准差0.63),PIVC 2为7.61°(标准差5.71)(P < 0.001)。0°的血流在90%的PIVC 1中出现,而PIVC 2中为16.7%(P < 0.001)。
在这项探索性研究中,与传统中心开口装置相比,具有偏轴尖端孔的外周血管通路装置显示出输注液流离静脉壁的角度更陡。这种重新定向可能会减少静脉壁创伤和并发症,不过需要进一步研究将临床结局与该技术相结合。