Cargando…
Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials
BACKGROUND: It is controversial whether the short-axis out-of-plane or long-axis in-plane approach is a better needling technique for ultrasound-guidance radial artery cannulation. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the two approaches for ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation. METH...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9596768/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36312257 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.983532 |
_version_ | 1784815938196996096 |
---|---|
author | Sun, Xia-xuan Lv, Meng Du, Wen-ya Liu, Yi Zhang, Haixia Wang, Yue-lan |
author_facet | Sun, Xia-xuan Lv, Meng Du, Wen-ya Liu, Yi Zhang, Haixia Wang, Yue-lan |
author_sort | Sun, Xia-xuan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: It is controversial whether the short-axis out-of-plane or long-axis in-plane approach is a better needling technique for ultrasound-guidance radial artery cannulation. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the two approaches for ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation. METHODS: A systematic search of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for relevant articles published until 1 May 2021 was conducted. Randomised controlled trials comparing the long-axis in-plane with short-axis out-of-plane approaches were included. Review Manager software version 5.4, STATA version 14.2, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) version 0.9.5.10 Beta were used for statistical analysis. Risk of bias and methodological quality of all studies included in this review were assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration tool for the risk of bias. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed to explore sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: The rate of cannula insertion success on the first attempt was similar between the short-axis out-of-plane and long-axis in-plane approaches (RR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.28; P = 0.79; I(2) = 83.0%). No significant differences were observed in total time to successful cannulation between the two approaches (MD = –3.9; 95% CI:-18.30 to 10.49; P = 0.6; I(2) = 97%). However, the required information size for the success rate of the first attempt and total time to successful cannulation was not reached. CONCLUSION: It remains inconclusive whether short-axis out-of-plane is a better choice for radial arterial cannulation than the long-axis in-plane approach. Inexperienced operators may need more attempts and longer ultrasound location time with the short-axis out-of-plane technique. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42021236098]. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9596768 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95967682022-10-27 Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials Sun, Xia-xuan Lv, Meng Du, Wen-ya Liu, Yi Zhang, Haixia Wang, Yue-lan Front Cardiovasc Med Cardiovascular Medicine BACKGROUND: It is controversial whether the short-axis out-of-plane or long-axis in-plane approach is a better needling technique for ultrasound-guidance radial artery cannulation. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the two approaches for ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation. METHODS: A systematic search of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for relevant articles published until 1 May 2021 was conducted. Randomised controlled trials comparing the long-axis in-plane with short-axis out-of-plane approaches were included. Review Manager software version 5.4, STATA version 14.2, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) version 0.9.5.10 Beta were used for statistical analysis. Risk of bias and methodological quality of all studies included in this review were assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration tool for the risk of bias. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed to explore sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: The rate of cannula insertion success on the first attempt was similar between the short-axis out-of-plane and long-axis in-plane approaches (RR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.28; P = 0.79; I(2) = 83.0%). No significant differences were observed in total time to successful cannulation between the two approaches (MD = –3.9; 95% CI:-18.30 to 10.49; P = 0.6; I(2) = 97%). However, the required information size for the success rate of the first attempt and total time to successful cannulation was not reached. CONCLUSION: It remains inconclusive whether short-axis out-of-plane is a better choice for radial arterial cannulation than the long-axis in-plane approach. Inexperienced operators may need more attempts and longer ultrasound location time with the short-axis out-of-plane technique. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42021236098]. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9596768/ /pubmed/36312257 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.983532 Text en Copyright © 2022 Sun, Lv, Du, Liu, Zhang and Wang. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Cardiovascular Medicine Sun, Xia-xuan Lv, Meng Du, Wen-ya Liu, Yi Zhang, Haixia Wang, Yue-lan Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title | Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full | Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_short | Comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: A systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_sort | comparison of out-of-plane short axis with in-plane long axis for ultrasound-guided radial arterial cannulation: a systematic review with trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials |
topic | Cardiovascular Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9596768/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36312257 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.983532 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sunxiaxuan comparisonofoutofplaneshortaxiswithinplanelongaxisforultrasoundguidedradialarterialcannulationasystematicreviewwithtrialsequentialanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT lvmeng comparisonofoutofplaneshortaxiswithinplanelongaxisforultrasoundguidedradialarterialcannulationasystematicreviewwithtrialsequentialanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT duwenya comparisonofoutofplaneshortaxiswithinplanelongaxisforultrasoundguidedradialarterialcannulationasystematicreviewwithtrialsequentialanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT liuyi comparisonofoutofplaneshortaxiswithinplanelongaxisforultrasoundguidedradialarterialcannulationasystematicreviewwithtrialsequentialanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT zhanghaixia comparisonofoutofplaneshortaxiswithinplanelongaxisforultrasoundguidedradialarterialcannulationasystematicreviewwithtrialsequentialanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT wangyuelan comparisonofoutofplaneshortaxiswithinplanelongaxisforultrasoundguidedradialarterialcannulationasystematicreviewwithtrialsequentialanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials |