Gualtieri E, Deppe S A, Sipperly M E, Thompson D R
Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, PA, USA.
Crit Care Med. 1995 Apr;23(4):692-7. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199504000-00018.
To determine if ultrasound guidance can be safely performed and improve success rates for subclavian venous catheterization performed by less experienced operators.
Prospective, randomized study.
Twenty-bed trauma-surgical-medical intensive care unit in a 524-bed, community, tertiary care, teaching hospital.
After the decision for central venous cannulation was made, informed consent was obtained, and less experienced operators then attempted to insert subclavian catheters in 33 critical care patients.
Catheter placements were attempted, either by landmark technique, ultrasound technique, or by landmark attempts with ultrasound salvage. Catheterization techniques to be used were randomized using a random number table.
Fifty-three placement procedures were attempted in 33 patients. One procedure was excluded from data analysis. Successful catheterizations, occurrence rates of complications, number of attempts, and number of catheter kits used were recorded. In the analysis, 52 catheterization procedures were studied. Twelve (44%) catheters were successfully placed from 27 attempts using the landmark technique vs. 23 (92%) successful catheterizations during 25 ultrasound procedures (p = .0003). Fifteen failed landmark technique attempts had ultrasound salvage attempted, with 12 (80%) catheters successfully inserted. Eleven complications (minor) occurred in 27 attempts of subclavian venous catheterization using conventional landmark technique vs. one complication (minor) in 25 attempts of subclavian venous catheterization with ultrasound guidance (p = .002). There were no major complications in either group. The landmark group required an average of 2.5 venipunctures and 1.4 catheter kits per attempted catheterization. The ultrasound group required an average of 1.4 venipuncture attempts and 1.0 insertion kit. The statistical significance in differences in groups for the average number of venipunctures was p = .0007 and average number of kits used was p = .0003.
Ultrasound guidance improves the success rate of subclavian venous catheterization performed by less experienced operators. There were no major complications in either group. Ultrasound guidance is usually successful in allowing performance of subclavian venous catheterizations when landmark techniques fail.
确定超声引导下由经验不足的操作人员进行锁骨下静脉置管是否能安全实施并提高成功率。
前瞻性随机研究。
一家拥有524张床位的社区三级护理教学医院的20张床位的创伤外科-内科重症监护病房。
在决定进行中心静脉置管后,获得知情同意,然后经验不足的操作人员尝试为33例重症患者插入锁骨下导管。
尝试通过体表标志技术、超声技术或体表标志法尝试失败后用超声辅助的方法进行导管置入。使用随机数字表随机确定使用的置管技术。
对33例患者进行了53次置管操作。有1次操作被排除在数据分析之外。记录成功置管情况、并发症发生率、尝试次数和使用的导管套件数量。在分析中,研究了52次置管操作。采用体表标志技术进行27次尝试,成功置入12根(44%)导管;而在25次超声引导操作中有23次(92%)成功置管(p = 0.0003)。体表标志技术失败的15次尝试中有12次进行了超声辅助,其中12根(80%)导管成功插入。采用传统体表标志技术进行27次锁骨下静脉置管尝试中有11例(轻微)并发症,而在超声引导下进行25次锁骨下静脉置管尝试中有1例(轻微)并发症(p = 0.002)。两组均无严重并发症。体表标志组每次置管平均需要2.5次静脉穿刺和1.4个导管套件。超声组平均需要1.4次静脉穿刺尝试和1.0个插入套件。两组静脉穿刺平均次数差异的统计学意义为p = 0.0007,使用套件的平均数量差异为p = 0.0003。
超声引导提高了经验不足的操作人员进行锁骨下静脉置管的成功率。两组均无严重并发症。当体表标志技术失败时,超声引导通常能成功进行锁骨下静脉置管。