Cargando…

Can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access?

Karakitsos and coworkers, in this journal, reported further compelling evidence on the value of ultrasound in guiding internal jugular vein catheterization. In a large, prospective, randomized study of 900 patients, comparisons were made between patients in whom the procedure was performed using lan...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Bodenham, Andrew R
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1794450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17129362
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc5079
_version_ 1782132179723091968
author Bodenham, Andrew R
author_facet Bodenham, Andrew R
author_sort Bodenham, Andrew R
collection PubMed
description Karakitsos and coworkers, in this journal, reported further compelling evidence on the value of ultrasound in guiding internal jugular vein catheterization. In a large, prospective, randomized study of 900 patients, comparisons were made between patients in whom the procedure was performed using landmark-based techniques and those assigned to ultrasound guidance. The key benefits from use of ultrasound included reduction in needle puncture time, increased overall success rate (100% versus 94%), reduction in carotid puncture (1% versus 11%), reduction in carotid haematoma (0.4% versus 8.4%), reduction in haemothorax (0% versus 1.7%), decreased pneumothorax (0% versus 2.4%) and reduction in catheter-related infection (10% versus 16%). The implications of these findings are discussed, and a compelling case for routine use of ultrasound to guide central venous access is made.
format Text
id pubmed-1794450
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-17944502007-02-08 Can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access? Bodenham, Andrew R Crit Care Commentary Karakitsos and coworkers, in this journal, reported further compelling evidence on the value of ultrasound in guiding internal jugular vein catheterization. In a large, prospective, randomized study of 900 patients, comparisons were made between patients in whom the procedure was performed using landmark-based techniques and those assigned to ultrasound guidance. The key benefits from use of ultrasound included reduction in needle puncture time, increased overall success rate (100% versus 94%), reduction in carotid puncture (1% versus 11%), reduction in carotid haematoma (0.4% versus 8.4%), reduction in haemothorax (0% versus 1.7%), decreased pneumothorax (0% versus 2.4%) and reduction in catheter-related infection (10% versus 16%). The implications of these findings are discussed, and a compelling case for routine use of ultrasound to guide central venous access is made. BioMed Central 2006 2006-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC1794450/ /pubmed/17129362 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc5079 Text en Copyright © 2006 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Bodenham, Andrew R
Can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access?
title Can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access?
title_full Can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access?
title_fullStr Can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access?
title_full_unstemmed Can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access?
title_short Can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access?
title_sort can you justify not using ultrasound guidance for central venous access?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1794450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17129362
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc5079
work_keys_str_mv AT bodenhamandrewr canyoujustifynotusingultrasoundguidanceforcentralvenousaccess