Cargando…
Comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review
BACKGROUND: The two most common methods for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation are the long-axis in-plane (LA-IP) and short-axis out-of-plane (SA-OOP) approaches. However, it is uncertain which method is more advantageous. We conducted a meta-analysis of reported randomized clinical trials (RCTs...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10100252/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37055775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-023-02076-2 |
_version_ | 1785025235626491904 |
---|---|
author | Cao, Lei Tan, Yu-ting Wei, Ting Li, Hong |
author_facet | Cao, Lei Tan, Yu-ting Wei, Ting Li, Hong |
author_sort | Cao, Lei |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The two most common methods for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation are the long-axis in-plane (LA-IP) and short-axis out-of-plane (SA-OOP) approaches. However, it is uncertain which method is more advantageous. We conducted a meta-analysis of reported randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the two techniques in terms of success rate, cannulation time, and complications. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database for RCTs comparing the LA-IP and SA-OOP techniques for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation published from inception through April 31, 2022. The Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias Tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of each RCT. Review Manager 5.4 and Stata/SE 17.0 were used to analyze the two primary outcome measures (first-attempt success rate and total success rate) and two secondary outcome measures (cannulation time and complications). RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs with 1,377 patients were included. There were no significant differences in first-attempt success rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78–1.12; P = 0.45; I(2) = 84%) and overall success rate (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95–1.02; P = 0.48; I(2) = 57%). When compared with the LA-IP technique, the SA-OOP technique was associated with an increased incidence of posterior wall puncture (RR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.27–7.14; P = 0.01; I(2) = 79%) and hematoma (RR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.05–4.37; P = 0.04; I(2) = 63%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of vasospasm between techniques (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.37–4.23; P = 0.07; I(2) = 53%). CONCLUSIONS: The present results suggest that the SA-OOP technique is associated with a higher incidence of posterior wall puncture and hematoma than the LA-IP technique, whereas success rates are similar for the two ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation techniques. These findings should be experimentally evaluated in a more rigorous manner due to high inter-RCT heterogeneity. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10100252 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101002522023-04-14 Comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review Cao, Lei Tan, Yu-ting Wei, Ting Li, Hong BMC Anesthesiol Research BACKGROUND: The two most common methods for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation are the long-axis in-plane (LA-IP) and short-axis out-of-plane (SA-OOP) approaches. However, it is uncertain which method is more advantageous. We conducted a meta-analysis of reported randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the two techniques in terms of success rate, cannulation time, and complications. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database for RCTs comparing the LA-IP and SA-OOP techniques for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation published from inception through April 31, 2022. The Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias Tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of each RCT. Review Manager 5.4 and Stata/SE 17.0 were used to analyze the two primary outcome measures (first-attempt success rate and total success rate) and two secondary outcome measures (cannulation time and complications). RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs with 1,377 patients were included. There were no significant differences in first-attempt success rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78–1.12; P = 0.45; I(2) = 84%) and overall success rate (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95–1.02; P = 0.48; I(2) = 57%). When compared with the LA-IP technique, the SA-OOP technique was associated with an increased incidence of posterior wall puncture (RR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.27–7.14; P = 0.01; I(2) = 79%) and hematoma (RR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.05–4.37; P = 0.04; I(2) = 63%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of vasospasm between techniques (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.37–4.23; P = 0.07; I(2) = 53%). CONCLUSIONS: The present results suggest that the SA-OOP technique is associated with a higher incidence of posterior wall puncture and hematoma than the LA-IP technique, whereas success rates are similar for the two ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation techniques. These findings should be experimentally evaluated in a more rigorous manner due to high inter-RCT heterogeneity. BioMed Central 2023-04-13 /pmc/articles/PMC10100252/ /pubmed/37055775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-023-02076-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Cao, Lei Tan, Yu-ting Wei, Ting Li, Hong Comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title | Comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_full | Comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_fullStr | Comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_short | Comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
title_sort | comparison between the long-axis in-plane and short-axis out-of-plane approaches for ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation: a meta-analysis and systematic review |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10100252/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37055775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-023-02076-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT caolei comparisonbetweenthelongaxisinplaneandshortaxisoutofplaneapproachesforultrasoundguidedarterialcannulationametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT tanyuting comparisonbetweenthelongaxisinplaneandshortaxisoutofplaneapproachesforultrasoundguidedarterialcannulationametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT weiting comparisonbetweenthelongaxisinplaneandshortaxisoutofplaneapproachesforultrasoundguidedarterialcannulationametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT lihong comparisonbetweenthelongaxisinplaneandshortaxisoutofplaneapproachesforultrasoundguidedarterialcannulationametaanalysisandsystematicreview |