-
Journal of Vascular Surgery. Venous and... May 2018Venous aneurysms are uncommon vascular abnormalities that may be identified anywhere in the body. Historically, they were often misdiagnosed as soft tissue lesions, but... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Venous aneurysms are uncommon vascular abnormalities that may be identified anywhere in the body. Historically, they were often misdiagnosed as soft tissue lesions, but with the advent of readily available noninvasive imaging (such as duplex ultrasound), they can now be easily identified. Our aim was to review the presentation of venous aneurysms, available imaging modalities for defining them, and management.
METHODS
The English-language literature before March 2017 was reviewed, and only reports of primary venous aneurysms of the deep veins were included. Reports were subdivided on the basis of the location of the venous aneurysm, and reports containing sample imaging studies were referenced from Elsevier publications.
RESULTS
In total, our review identified reports of 35 head and neck venous aneurysms, 42 thoracic venous aneurysms, 152 intra-abdominal venous aneurysms, and 279 venous aneurysms of the extremities. Venous aneurysms of the lower extremity deep veins were most likely to be manifested by venous thromboembolic events, with approximately 25% to 50% of popliteal vein aneurysms presenting with pulmonary embolism. Diagnosis can be made by duplex ultrasound, computed tomography venography, magnetic resonance venography, or invasive venography. Management varies by location; most thoracic and head and neck aneurysms are observed, whereas venous aneurysms of the extremities are treated with surgical intervention, given the potential for venous thromboembolism. Few reports describe endovascular management of these lesions, so open surgical intervention remains the standard of care.
CONCLUSIONS
Venous aneurysms are rare vascular malformations that occur throughout the body. Many are identified on routine imaging ordered for other indications, whereas venous aneurysms of the deep veins of the extremities are often manifested with venous thromboembolism. Management of these lesions is determined largely by location and the potential morbidity and mortality of the untreated aneurysms vs surgery; aneurysms of the head and neck and thorax are managed with observation and serial imaging over time, whereas those of the abdomen and extremities are treated with surgical intervention. Endovascular techniques continue to lack a defined role in their management, and the standard of care remains open repair, when indicated.
Topics: Aneurysm; Humans; Jugular Veins; Magnetic Resonance Angiography; Mesenteric Veins; Phlebography; Popliteal Vein; Subclavian Vein; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex
PubMed: 29661366
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2017.11.014 -
JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions Jul 2017The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the incidence of infective endocarditis (IE) in right ventricle-to-pulmonary artery conduits and valves, comparing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the incidence of infective endocarditis (IE) in right ventricle-to-pulmonary artery conduits and valves, comparing bovine jugular vein (BJV) valves with all others.
BACKGROUND
Recent evidence suggests that the incidence of IE is higher in patients with congenital heart disease who have undergone implantation of BJV valves in the pulmonary position compared with other valves.
METHODS
Systematic searches of published research were conducted using electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL) and citations cross-referenced current to April 2016. Included studies met the following criteria: patients had undergone right ventricle-to-pulmonary artery conduit or percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation, and investigators reported on the type of conduit or valve implanted, method of intervention (surgery or catheter based), IE incidence, and follow-up time.
RESULTS
Fifty studies (Levels of Evidence: 2 to 4) were identified involving 7,063 patients. The median cumulative incidence of IE was higher for BJV compared with other valves (5.4% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.0001) during a median follow-up period of 24.0 and 35.5 months, respectively (p = 0.03). For patients with BJV valves, the incidence of IE was not different between surgical and catheter-based valve implantation (p = 0.83).
CONCLUSIONS
There was a higher incidence of endocarditis with BJV valves than other types of right ventricle-to-pulmonary artery conduits. There was no difference in the incidence of endocarditis between catheter-based bovine valves and surgically implanted bovine valves, suggesting that the substrate for future infection is related to the tissue rather than the method of implantation.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Allografts; Animals; Bioprosthesis; Cattle; Child; Child, Preschool; Endocarditis; Female; Heart Defects, Congenital; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Heterografts; Humans; Incidence; Infant; Jugular Veins; Male; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Prosthesis Design; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Pulmonary Valve; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Venous Valves; Young Adult
PubMed: 28728659
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.04.025 -
Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine :... Dec 2017The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (US) for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (US) for confirming the tip location and placement of central venous catheters in adult patients.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed using electronic databases, including MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus. Inclusion criteria were studies conducted on adult patients receiving an internal jugular or a subclavian central venous catheter in the emergency department or intensive care unit. Furthermore, the catheter tip location had to be checked with the use of the agitated saline contrast-enhanced US technique.
RESULTS
A total of 2245 articles were screened by title and abstract. Seventeen articles were retrieved and assessed for the predefined inclusion criteria. Four articles and 1 abstract were used in the final analysis. Contrast-enhanced US showed pooled sensitivity of 72% (95% confidence interval, 44%-91%), pooled specificity of 100% (95% confidence interval, 99%-100%), a positive predictive value of 92.1%, and a negative predictive value of 98.5% compared with chest radiography for confirming the placement of central venous catheters.
CONCLUSIONS
In the setting of central venous catheter placement, postprocedural contrast-enhanced US imaging is a safe, efficient, and highly specific confirmatory test for the catheter tip location compared with chest radiography.
Topics: Catheterization, Central Venous; Central Venous Catheters; Contrast Media; Humans; Image Enhancement; Jugular Veins; Sensitivity and Specificity; Subclavian Vein; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 28660688
DOI: 10.1002/jum.14296 -
BMC Nephrology Feb 2017Optimising filter life and performance efficiency in continuous renal replacement therapy has been a focus of considerable recent research. Larger high quality studies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Optimising filter life and performance efficiency in continuous renal replacement therapy has been a focus of considerable recent research. Larger high quality studies have predominantly focussed on optimal anticoagulation however CRRT is complex and filter life is also affected by vascular access, circuit and management factors. We performed a systematic search of the literature to identify and quantify the effect of vascular access, circuit and patient factors that affect filter life and presented the results as a meta-analysis.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching Pubmed (MEDLINE) and Ovid EMBASE libraries from inception to 29 February 2016 for all studies with a comparator or independent variable relating to CRRT circuits and reporting filter life. Included studies documented filter life in hours with a comparator other than anti-coagulation intervention. All studies comparing anticoagulation interventions were searched for regression or hazard models pertaining to other sources of variation in filter life.
RESULTS
Eight hundred nineteen abstracts were identified of which 364 were selected for full text analysis. 24 presented data on patient modifiers of circuit life, 14 on vascular access modifiers and 34 on circuit related factors. Risk of bias was high and findings are hypothesis generating. Ranking of vascular access site by filter longevity favours: tunnelled semi-permanent catheters, femoral, internal jugular and subclavian last. There is inconsistency in the difference reported between femoral and jugular catheters. Amongst published literature, modality of CRRT consistently favoured continuous veno-venous haemodiafiltration (CVVHD-F) with an associated 44% lower failure rate compared to CVVH. There was a trend favouring higher blood flow rates. There is insufficient data to determine advantages of haemofilter membranes. Patient factors associated with a statistically significant worsening of filter life included mechanical ventilation, elevated SOFA or LOD score, elevations in ionized calcium, elevated platelet count, red cell transfusion, platelet factor 4 (PF-4) antibodies, and elevated fibrinogen. Majority of studies are observational or report circuit factors in sub-analysis. Risk of bias is high and findings require targeted investigations to confirm.
CONCLUSION
The interaction of patient, pathology, anticoagulation, vascular access, circuit and staff factors contribute to CRRT filter life. There remains an ambiguity from published data as to which site and side should be the first choice for vascular access placement and what interaction this has with patient factors and timing. Early consideration of tunnelled semi-permanent access may provide optimal filter life if longer periods of CRRT are anticipated. There remains an absence of robust evidence outside of anti-coagulation strategies despite over 20 years of therapy delivery however trends favour CVVHD-F over CVVH.
Topics: Autoantibodies; Calcium; Erythrocyte Transfusion; Fibrinogen; Hemodiafiltration; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Organ Dysfunction Scores; Platelet Factor 4; Renal Dialysis; Renal Replacement Therapy; Respiration, Artificial; Thrombocytosis; Time Factors
PubMed: 28219324
DOI: 10.1186/s12882-017-0445-5 -
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery Feb 2017We performed a systematic review to determine best practice for the management of patients with chronic or subacute subclavian vein thrombosis. This condition is best... (Review)
Review
We performed a systematic review to determine best practice for the management of patients with chronic or subacute subclavian vein thrombosis. This condition is best managed with surgical excision of the first rib followed by long-term anticoagulation. Interventional techniques aimed at restoring patency are ineffective beyond 2 weeks postthrombosis. Additional therapeutic options should be made based on the severity of symptoms as well as vein status. Patients with milder symptoms are given decompression surgery followed by anticoagulation whereas patients with more severe symptoms are considered for either a jugular vein transposition or saphenous patch based on the vein characteristics.
Topics: Chronic Disease; Disease Management; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Subclavian Vein; Thrombectomy; Thrombolytic Therapy; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 28024649
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.09.051 -
Critical Care Medicine Apr 2017We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the accuracy of bedside ultrasound for confirmation of central venous catheter position and exclusion of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Diagnostic Accuracy of Central Venous Catheter Confirmation by Bedside Ultrasound Versus Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
OBJECTIVE
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the accuracy of bedside ultrasound for confirmation of central venous catheter position and exclusion of pneumothorax compared with chest radiography.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists, conference proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov.
STUDY SELECTION
Articles and abstracts describing the diagnostic accuracy of bedside ultrasound compared with chest radiography for confirmation of central venous catheters in sufficient detail to reconstruct 2 × 2 contingency tables were reviewed. Primary outcomes included the accuracy of confirming catheter positioning and detecting a pneumothorax. Secondary outcomes included feasibility, interrater reliability, and efficiency to complete bedside ultrasound confirmation of central venous catheter position.
DATA EXTRACTION
Investigators abstracted study details including research design and sonographic imaging technique to detect catheter malposition and procedure-related pneumothorax. Diagnostic accuracy measures included pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Fifteen studies with 1,553 central venous catheter placements were identified with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of catheter malposition by ultrasound of 0.82 (0.77-0.86) and 0.98 (0.97-0.99), respectively. The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios of catheter malposition by ultrasound were 31.12 (14.72-65.78) and 0.25 (0.13-0.47). The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for pneumothorax detection was nearly 100% in the participating studies. Bedside ultrasound reduced mean central venous catheter confirmation time by 58.3 minutes. Risk of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the studies were high.
CONCLUSIONS
Bedside ultrasound is faster than radiography at identifying pneumothorax after central venous catheter insertion. When a central venous catheter malposition exists, bedside ultrasound will identify four out of every five earlier than chest radiography.
Topics: Catheterization, Central Venous; Critical Illness; Humans; Jugular Veins; Pneumothorax; Point-of-Care Systems; Radiography, Thoracic; Subclavian Vein; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 27922877
DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002188 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2016Totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAPs) provide patients with a safe and permanent venous access, for instance in the administration of chemotherapy for... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAPs) provide patients with a safe and permanent venous access, for instance in the administration of chemotherapy for oncology patients. There are several methods for TIVAP placement, and the optimal evidence-based method is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of three commonly used techniques for implanting TIVAPs: the venous cutdown technique, the Seldinger technique, and the modified Seldinger technique. This review includes studies that use Doppler or real-time two-dimensional ultrasonography for locating the vein in the Seldinger technique.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Vascular Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register (last searched August 2015) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 7), as well as clinical trials registers.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials that randomly allocated people requiring TIVAP to the venous cutdown, Seldinger, or modified Seldinger technique. Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion eligibility, with a third review author checking excluded studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data. We assessed all studies for risk of bias. We assessed heterogeneity using Chi(2) statistic and variance (I(2)statistic) methods. Dichotomous outcomes, summarised as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI), were: primary implantation success, complications (in particular infection), pneumothorax, and catheter complications. We conducted separate analyses to assess the two access veins, subclavian and internal jugular (IJ) vein, in the Seldinger technique versus the venous cutdown technique. We used both intention-to-treat (ITT) and on-treatment analyses and pooled data using a fixed-effect model.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine studies with a total of 1253 participants in the review. Five studies compared Seldinger technique (subclavian vein access) with venous cutdown technique (cephalic vein access). Two studies compared Seldinger (IJ vein) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein). One study compared the modified Seldinger technique (cephalic vein) with the venous cutdown (cephalic vein), and one study compared the Seldinger (subclavian vein) versus the Seldinger (IJ vein) technique.Seldinger technique (subclavian or IJ vein access) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein): We included seven trials with 1006 participants for analysis. Both ITT (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.65) and on-treatment analysis (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.98) showed that the Seldinger technique for implantation of TIVAP had a higher success rate compared with the venous cutdown technique. We found no difference between overall peri- and postoperative complication rates: ITT (OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.75) and on-treatment analysis (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.40). In the Seldinger group, the majority of the trials reported use of the subclavian vein for venous access, with only a limited number of trials utilising the IJ vein for access. When individual complication rates of infection, pneumothorax, and catheter complications were analysed, the Seldinger technique (subclavian vein access) was associated with a higher rate of catheter complications compared to the venous cutdown technique: ITT (OR 6.77; 95% CI 2.31 to 19.79) and on-treatment analysis (OR 6.62; 95% CI 2.24 to 19.58). There was no difference in incidence of infections, pneumothorax, and other complications between the groups.Modified Seldinger technique (cephalic vein) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein): We identified one trial with 164 participants. ITT analysis showed no difference in primary implantation success rate between the modified Seldinger technique (69/82, 84%) and the venous cutdown technique (66/82, 80%), P = 0.686. We observed no differences in the peri- or postoperative complication rates.Seldinger (subclavian vein access) versus Seldinger (IJ vein access): We identified one trial with 83 participants. The primary success rate was 84% (37/44) for Seldinger (subclavian vein) versus 74% (29/39) for the Seldinger (IJ vein). There was a higher overall complication rate in the subclavian group (48%) compared to the jugular group (23%), P = 0.02. However, when specific complications were compared individually, we found no differences between the groups.The overall quality of the trials included in this review was moderate. The methods used for randomisation were inadequate in four of the nine included studies, but sensitivity analysis excluding these trials did not alter the outcome. The nature of the interventions, either venous cutdown or Seldinger techniques, meant that it was not feasible to blind the participant or personnel, therefore we judged this to be at low risk of bias. The majority of participants in the included trials were oncology patients at tertiary centres, and the outcomes were applicable to the typical clinical scenario. For all outcomes, when comparing venous cutdown and Seldinger technique, serious imprecision was evident by wide confidence intervals in the included trials. The quality of the overall evidence was therefore downgraded from high to moderate. Due to the limited number of included studies we were unable to assess publication bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Moderate-quality evidence showed that the Seldinger technique has a higher primary implantation success rate compared with the venous cutdown technique. The majority of trials using the Seldinger technique used the subclavian vein for venous access, and only a few trials reported the use of the internal jugular vein for venous access. Moderate-quality evidence showed no difference in the overall complication rate between the Seldinger and venous cutdown techniques. However, when the Seldinger technique with subclavian vein access was compared with the venous cutdown group, there was a higher reported incidence of catheter complications. The rates of pneumothorax and infection did not differ between the Seldinger and venous cutdown group. We identified only one trial for each of the comparisons modified Seldinger technique (cephalic vein) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein) and Seldinger (subclavian vein access) versus Seldinger (IJ vein access), thus a definitive conclusion cannot be drawn for these comparisons and further research is recommended.
Topics: Arm; Catheter-Related Infections; Catheterization, Central Venous; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Jugular Veins; Pneumothorax; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Subclavian Vein; Ultrasonography, Interventional; Vascular Access Devices; Veins; Venous Cutdown
PubMed: 27544827
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008942.pub2 -
Preoperative diagnosis of vagal and sympathetic cervical schwannomas based on radiographic findings.Journal of Neurosurgery Mar 2017OBJECTIVE Vagus nerve and sympathetic chain cervical schwannomas (VNCSs and SCCSs) are benign nerve sheath tumors that arise in the head and neck. Despite similar...
OBJECTIVE Vagus nerve and sympathetic chain cervical schwannomas (VNCSs and SCCSs) are benign nerve sheath tumors that arise in the head and neck. Despite similar presentations that make accurate preoperative diagnosis more difficult, the potential for morbidity following resection is significantly higher for patients with VNCS. Therefore, the authors analyzed a retrospective case series and performed a comparative analysis of the literature to establish diagnostic criteria to facilitate more accurate preoperative diagnoses. METHODS The authors conducted a blinded review of imaging studies from retrospectively collected, operatively confirmed cases of VNCS and SCCS. They also performed a systematic review of published series that reported patient-specific preoperative imaging findings in VNCS or SCCS. RESULTS Nine patients with VNCS and 11 with SCCS were identified. In the study cohort, splaying of the internal carotid artery (ICA) and internal jugular vein (IJV) did not significantly predict the nerve of origin (p = 0.06); however, medial and lateral ICA displacement were significantly associated with VNCS and SCCS, respectively (p = 0.01 and p = 0.003, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that ICA and IJV splaying with medial ICA displacement carried an 86% probability of VNCS (p = 0.001), while the absence of splaying with lateral ICA displacement carried a 91% probability of SCCS (p = 0.006). The presence of vocal cord symptoms or peripheral enhancement significantly augmented the predictive probability of VNCS, as did Horner's syndrome or homogeneous enhancement for SCCS. A review of the literature produced 25 publications that incorporated a total of 106 patients, including the present series. Splaying of the ICA and IJV was significantly, but not uniquely, associated with VNCS (p < 0.0001); multivariate analysis demonstrated that ICA and IJV splaying with medial ICA displacement carries a 75% probability of VNCS (p < 0.0001), while the absence of such splaying with lateral ICA displacement carries an 87% probability of SCCS (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS ICA and IJV splaying frequently predicts VNCS; however, this finding is also commonly observed in SCCS and, among the 9 cases in the present study, was observed more often than previously reported. When congruent with splaying, medial or lateral ICA displacement significantly enhances the reliability of preoperative predictions, empowering more accurate prognostication.
Topics: Diagnosis, Differential; Female; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neurilemmoma; Preoperative Care; Retrospective Studies; Vagus Nerve
PubMed: 27104848
DOI: 10.3171/2016.1.JNS151763 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2015Central venous catheters can help with diagnosis and treatment of the critically ill. The catheter may be placed in a large vein in the neck (internal jugular vein),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Central venous catheters can help with diagnosis and treatment of the critically ill. The catheter may be placed in a large vein in the neck (internal jugular vein), upper chest (subclavian vein) or groin (femoral vein). Whilst this is beneficial overall, inserting the catheter risks arterial puncture and other complications and should be performed in as few attempts as possible.In the past, anatomical 'landmarks' on the body surface were used to find the correct place to insert these catheters, but ultrasound imaging is now available. A Doppler mode is sometimes used to supplement plain 'two-dimensional' ultrasound.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of two-dimensional ultrasound (US)- or Doppler ultrasound (USD)-guided puncture techniques for subclavian vein, axillary vein and femoral vein puncture during central venous catheter insertion in adults and children. We assessed whether there was a difference in complication rates between traditional landmark-guided and any ultrasound-guided central vein puncture.When possible, we also assessed the following secondary objectives: whether a possible difference could be verified with use of the US technique versus the USD technique; whether there was a difference between using ultrasound throughout the puncture ('direct') and using it only to identify and mark the vein before starting the puncture procedure ('indirect'); and whether these possible differences might be evident in different groups of patients or with different levels of experience among those inserting the catheters.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to 15 January 2013), EMBASE (1966 to 15 January 2013), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to 15 January 2013), reference lists of articles, 'grey literature' and dissertations. An additional handsearch focused on intensive care and anaesthesia journals and abstracts and proceedings of scientific meetings. We attempted to identify unpublished or ongoing studies by contacting companies and experts in the field, and we searched trial registers. We reran the search in August 2014. We will deal with any studies of interest when we update the review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing two-dimensional ultrasound or Doppler ultrasound versus an anatomical 'landmark' technique during insertion of subclavian or femoral venous catheters in both adults and children.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest using a standardized form. We performed a priori subgroup analyses.
MAIN RESULTS
Altogether 13 studies enrolling 2341 participants (and involving 2360 procedures) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The quality of evidence was very low (subclavian vein N = 3) or low (subclavian vein N = 4, femoral vein N = 2) for most outcomes, moderate for one outcome (femoral vein) and high at best for two outcomes (subclavian vein N = 1, femoral vein N = 1). Most of the trials had unclear risk of bias across the six domains, and heterogeneity among the studies was significant.For the subclavian vein (nine studies, 2030 participants, 2049 procedures), two-dimensional ultrasound reduced the risk of inadvertent arterial puncture (three trials, 498 participants, risk ratio (RR) 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.82; P value 0.02, I² = 0%) and haematoma formation (three trials, 498 participants, RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.76; P value 0.01, I² = 0%). No evidence was found of a difference in total or other complications (together, US, USD), overall (together, US, USD), number of attempts until success (US) or first-time (US) success rates or time taken to insert the catheter (US).For the femoral vein, fewer data were available for analysis (four studies, 311 participants, 311 procedures). No evidence was found of a difference in inadvertent arterial puncture or other complications. However, success on the first attempt was more likely with ultrasound (three trials, 224 participants, RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.22; P value < 0.0001, I² = 31%), and a small increase in the overall success rate was noted (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.23; P value 0.06, I² = 50%). No data on mortality or participant-reported outcomes were provided.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of available data, we conclude that two-dimensional ultrasound offers small gains in safety and quality when compared with an anatomical landmark technique for subclavian (arterial puncture, haematoma formation) or femoral vein (success on the first attempt) cannulation for central vein catheterization. Data on insertion by inexperienced or experienced users, or on patients at high risk for complications, are lacking. The results for Doppler ultrasound techniques versus anatomical landmark techniques are uncertain.
Topics: Adult; Anatomic Landmarks; Catheterization, Central Venous; Child; Critical Illness; Femoral Vein; Humans; Punctures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Subclavian Vein; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 25575245
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011447 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2015Central venous catheters (CVCs) can help with diagnosis and treatment of the critically ill. The catheter may be placed in a large vein in the neck (internal jugular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Central venous catheters (CVCs) can help with diagnosis and treatment of the critically ill. The catheter may be placed in a large vein in the neck (internal jugular vein), upper chest (subclavian vein) or groin (femoral vein). Whilst this is beneficial overall, inserting the catheter risks arterial puncture and other complications and should be performed with as few attempts as possible. Traditionally, anatomical 'landmarks' on the body surface were used to find the correct place in which to insert catheters, but ultrasound imaging is now available. A Doppler mode is sometimes used to supplement plain 'two-dimensional' ultrasound.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of two-dimensional (imaging ultrasound (US) or ultrasound Doppler (USD)) guided puncture techniques for insertion of central venous catheters via the internal jugular vein in adults and children. We assessed whether there was a difference in complication rates between traditional landmark-guided and any ultrasound-guided central vein puncture.Our secondary objectives were to assess whether the effect differs between US and USD; whether the effect differs between ultrasound used throughout the puncture ('direct') and ultrasound used only to identify and mark the vein before the start of the puncture procedure (indirect'); and whether the effect differs between different groups of patients or between different levels of experience among those inserting the catheters.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to 15 January 2013), EMBASE (1966 to 15 January 2013), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to 15 January 2013 ), reference lists of articles, 'grey literature' and dissertations. An additional handsearch focused on intensive care and anaesthesia journals and abstracts and proceedings of scientific meetings. We attempted to identify unpublished or ongoing studies by contacting companies and experts in the field, and we searched trial registers. We reran the search in August 2014. We will deal with identified studies of interest when we update the review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing two-dimensional ultrasound or Doppler ultrasound with an anatomical 'landmark' technique during insertion of internal jugular venous catheters in both adults and children.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest using a standardized form. A priori, we aimed to perform subgroup analyses, when possible, for adults and children, and for experienced operators and inexperienced operators.
MAIN RESULTS
Of 735 identified citations, 35 studies enrolling 5108 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The quality of evidence was very low for most of the outcomes and was moderate at best for four of the outcomes. Most trials had an unclear risk of bias across the six domains, and heterogeneity among the studies was significant.Use of two-dimensional ultrasound reduced the rate of total complications overall by 71% (14 trials, 2406 participants, risk ratio (RR) 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.52; P value < 0.0001, I² = 57%), and the number of participants with an inadvertent arterial puncture by 72% (22 trials, 4388 participants, RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.44; P value < 0.00001, I² = 35%). Overall success rates were modestly increased in all groups combined at 12% (23 trials, 4340 participants, RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.17; P value < 0.00001, I² = 85%), and similar benefit was noted across all subgroups. The number of attempts needed for successful cannulation was decreased overall (16 trials, 3302 participants, mean difference (MD) -1.19 attempts, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.92; P value < 0.00001, I² = 96%) and in all subgroups. Use of two-dimensional ultrasound increased the chance of success at the first attempt by 57% (18 trials, 2681 participants, RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.82; P value < 0.00001, I² = 82%) and reduced the chance of haematoma formation (overall reduction 73%, 13 trials, 3233 participants, RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.55; P value 0.0004, I² = 54%). Use of two-dimensional ultrasound decreased the time to successful cannulation by 30.52 seconds (MD -30.52 seconds, 95% CI -55.21 to -5.82; P value 0.02, I² = 97%). Additional data are available to support use of ultrasound during, not simply before, line insertion.Use of Doppler ultrasound increased the chance of success at the first attempt by 58% (four trials, 199 participants, RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.43; P value 0.04, I² = 57%). No evidence showed a difference for the total numbers of perioperative and postoperative complications/adverse events (three trials, 93 participants, RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.71; P value 0.28), the overall success rate (seven trials, 289 participants, RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.25; P value 0.20), the total number of attempts until success (two trials, 69 participants, MD -0.63, 95% CI -1.92 to 0.66; P value 0.34), the overall number of participants with an arterial puncture (six trials, 213 participants, RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.73; P value 0.35) and time to successful cannulation (five trials, 214 participants, each using a different definition for this outcome; MD 62.04 seconds, 95% CI -13.47 to 137.55; P value 0.11) when Doppler ultrasound was used. It was not possible to perform analyses for the other outcomes because they were reported in only one trial.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on available data, we conclude that two-dimensional ultrasound offers gains in safety and quality when compared with an anatomical landmark technique. Because of missing data, we did not compare effects with experienced versus inexperienced operators for all outcomes (arterial puncture, haematoma formation, other complications, success with attempt number one), and so the relative utility of ultrasound in these groups remains unclear and no data are available on use of this technique in patients at high risk of complications. The results for Doppler ultrasound techniques versus anatomical landmark techniques are also uncertain.
Topics: Adult; Anatomic Landmarks; Catheterization, Central Venous; Child; Humans; Jugular Veins; Punctures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 25575244
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006962.pub2