Next article Search Articles Instructions for authors  Access Statistics | Citation Manager  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1104    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded100    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

Comparison between marked versus unmarked introducer needle in real-time ultrasound-guided central vein cannulation: A prospective randomized study


1 Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, IIMS and R, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Critical Care Medicine, SGPGIMS, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Tanmoy Ghatak
Rammohan Pally, Arambagh, Hooghly - 712 601, West Bengal
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0971-9784.191563

Rights and Permissions

Year : 2016  |  Volume : 19  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 621-625

 

SEARCH
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles

  Article in PDF (732 KB)
Email article
Print Article
Add to My List
Introduction: Introducer needle tip is not clearly visible during the real-time ultrasound (US)-guided central vein cannulation (CVC). Blind tip leads to mechanical complications. This study was designed to evaluate whether real-time US-guided CVC with a marked introducer needle is superior to the existing unmarked needle. Methodology: Sixty-two critically ill patients aged 18–60 years of either sex were included in the study. The patients were randomized into two groups based on whether a marked or unmarked introducer needle was used. Both groups underwent real-time US-guided CVC by a single experienced operator. Aseptically, introducer needle was indented with markings spaced 0.5 cm (single marking) and every 1 cm (double marking). This needle was used in the marked group. Approximate depths (centimeter) of the anterior and posterior wall of the internal jugular vein, anterior wall of the internal carotid artery, and lung pleura were appreciated from the midpoint of the probe in short-axis view at the level of the cricoid cartilage. Access time (seconds) was recorded using a stopwatch. A number of attempts and complications such as arterial puncture, hematoma, and pneumothorax of either procedure were compared. Results: Both marked needle and unmarked needle groups were comparable with regard to age, gender, severity scores, platelet counts, prothrombin time, and distance from the midpoint of the probe to the vein, artery, and pleura and skin-to-guide wire insertion access time. However, an average number of attempts (P = 0.03) and complications such as hematoma were significantly lower (P = 0.02) with the marked introducer needle group. Pneumothorax was not reported in any of the groups.Conclusion: Our study supports the idea that marked introducer needle can further reduce the iatrogenic complications of US-guided CVC.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
 

 

 

 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 
 
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
  *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 
 ORIGINAL ARTICLE
 




1 Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, IIMS and R, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Critical Care Medicine, SGPGIMS, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Tanmoy Ghatak
Rammohan Pally, Arambagh, Hooghly - 712 601, West Bengal
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0971-9784.191563

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Introducer needle tip is not clearly visible during the real-time ultrasound (US)-guided central vein cannulation (CVC). Blind tip leads to mechanical complications. This study was designed to evaluate whether real-time US-guided CVC with a marked introducer needle is superior to the existing unmarked needle. Methodology: Sixty-two critically ill patients aged 18–60 years of either sex were included in the study. The patients were randomized into two groups based on whether a marked or unmarked introducer needle was used. Both groups underwent real-time US-guided CVC by a single experienced operator. Aseptically, introducer needle was indented with markings spaced 0.5 cm (single marking) and every 1 cm (double marking). This needle was used in the marked group. Approximate depths (centimeter) of the anterior and posterior wall of the internal jugular vein, anterior wall of the internal carotid artery, and lung pleura were appreciated from the midpoint of the probe in short-axis view at the level of the cricoid cartilage. Access time (seconds) was recorded using a stopwatch. A number of attempts and complications such as arterial puncture, hematoma, and pneumothorax of either procedure were compared. Results: Both marked needle and unmarked needle groups were comparable with regard to age, gender, severity scores, platelet counts, prothrombin time, and distance from the midpoint of the probe to the vein, artery, and pleura and skin-to-guide wire insertion access time. However, an average number of attempts (P = 0.03) and complications such as hematoma were significantly lower (P = 0.02) with the marked introducer needle group. Pneumothorax was not reported in any of the groups.Conclusion: Our study supports the idea that marked introducer needle can further reduce the iatrogenic complications of US-guided CVC.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article