36
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      What is the best site for central venous catheter insertion in critically ill patients?

      research-article
      1 ,
      Critical Care
      BioMed Central
      catheter, catheter-related infection, complications, femoral, iatrogenic, jugular, pneumothorax, subclavian

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The choice of the best central venous access for a particular patient is based on the rate and the severity of failures and complications. Based on two recent papers, internal jugular access is associated with a low rate of severe mechanical complications in the intensive care unit as compared with subclavian access, and it is preferable for short-term access (<5–7 days) and for haemodialysis catheters. Subclavian access is associated with a lower risk for infection and is the route of choice, in experienced hands, if the risk for infection is high (central venous catheter placement >5–7 days) or if the risk for mechanical complications is low. The femoral route is associated with a higher risk for infection and thrombosis (as compared with the subclavian route). It should be restricted to patients in whom pneumothorax or haemorrhage would be unacceptable.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Complications of femoral and subclavian venous catheterization in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial.

          Whether venous catheterization at the femoral site is associated with an increased risk of complications compared with that at the subclavian site is debated. To compare mechanical, infectious, and thrombotic complications of femoral and subclavian venous catheterization. Concealed, randomized controlled clinical trial conducted between December 1997 and July 2000 at 8 intensive care units (ICUs) in France. Two hundred eighty-nine adult patients receiving a first central venous catheter. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo central venous catheterization at the femoral site (n = 145) or subclavian site (n = 144). Rate and severity of mechanical, infectious, and thrombotic complications, compared by catheterization site in 289, 270, and 223 patients, respectively. Femoral catheterization was associated with a higher incidence rate of overall infectious complications (19.8% vs 4.5%; P<.001; incidence density of 20 vs 3.7 per 1000 catheter-days) and of major infectious complications (clinical sepsis with or without bloodstream infection, 4.4% vs 1.5%; P =.07; incidence density of 4.5 vs 1.2 per 1000 catheter-days), as well as of overall thrombotic complications (21.5% vs 1.9%; P<.001) and complete thrombosis of the vessel (6% vs 0%; P =.01); rates of overall and major mechanical complications were similar between the 2 groups (17.3% vs 18.8 %; P =.74 and 1.4% vs 2.8%; P =.44, respectively). Risk factors for mechanical complications were duration of insertion (odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.08 per additional minute; P<.001); insertion in 2 of the centers (OR, 4.52; 95% CI, 1.81-11.23; P =.001); and insertion during the night (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.04-4.08; P =.03). The only factor associated with infectious complications was femoral catheterization (hazard ratio [HR], 4.83; 95% CI, 1.96-11.93; P<.001); antibiotic administration via the catheter decreased risk of infectious complications (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.18-0.93; P =.03). Femoral catheterization was the only risk factor for thrombotic complications (OR, 14.42; 95% CI, 3.33-62.57; P<.001). Femoral venous catheterization is associated with a greater risk of infectious and thrombotic complications than subclavian catheterization in ICU patients.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Complications of central venous catheters: internal jugular versus subclavian access--a systematic review.

            To test whether complications happen more often with the internal jugular or the subclavian central venous approach. Systematic search (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, bibliographies) up to June 30, 2000, with no language restriction. Reports on prospective comparisons of internal jugular vs. subclavian catheter insertion, with dichotomous data on complications. No valid randomized trials were found. Seventeen prospective comparative trials with data on 2,085 jugular and 2,428 subclavian catheters were analyzed. Meta-analyses were performed with relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), using fixed and random effects models. In six trials (2,010 catheters), there were significantly more arterial punctures with jugular catheters compared with subclavian (3.0% vs. 0.5%, RR 4.70 [95% CI, 2.05-10.77]). In six trials (1,299 catheters), there were significantly less malpositions with the jugular access (5.3% vs. 9.3%, RR 0.66 [0.44-0.99]). In three trials (707 catheters), the incidence of bloodstream infection was 8.6% with the jugular access and 4.0% with the subclavian access (RR 2.24 [0.62-8.09]). In ten trials (3,420 catheters), the incidence of hemato- or pneumothorax was 1.3% vs. 1.5% (RR 0.76 [0.43--1.33]). In four trials (899), the incidence of vessel occlusion was 0% vs. 1.2% (RR 0.29 [0.07-1.33]). There are more arterial punctures but less catheter malpositions with the internal jugular compared with the subclavian access. There is no evidence of any difference in the incidence of hemato- or pneumothorax and vessel occlusion. Data on bloodstream infection are scarce. These data are from nonrandomized studies; selection bias cannot be ruled out. In terms of risk, the data most likely represent a best case scenario. For rational decision-making, randomized trials are needed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Complications and failures of subclavian-vein catheterization.

              Although catheterization of the subclavian vein is a common procedure, the risk factors for complications and failures, with the exception of the physician's experience, are poorly understood. Ultrasonography has been recommended to help guide the placement of central venous catheters. We conducted a prospective randomized trial of ultrasound-guided location of the subclavian vein as compared with standard insertion procedures. In the group of patients undergoing catheterization with ultrasound guidance, the site of the insertion was marked before the catheterization attempt; real-time ultrasound guidance was not used. The 821 eligible patients (411 in the ultrasound group and 410 in the control group) underwent catheterization in a single procedure suite under controlled nonemergency conditions, in most cases for the administration of chemotherapy. Ultrasound guidance had no effect on the rate of complications or failures of subclavian-vein catheterization (risk ratio for complications, 1.00; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.66 to 1.52; risk ratio for failures, 1.04; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.72 to 1.50). In multivariate analyses, prior major surgery in the region (P = 0.002), a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) higher than 30 or lower than 20 (P = 0.009), and previous catheterization (P = 0.043) were associated with failed attempts. Complications were also associated with failed attempts: 52 of the 721 patients (7.2 percent) in whom catheterization was successful had complications, as compared with 28 of the 100 patients (28 percent) in whom physicians were unable to place catheters. The number of needle passes was strongly associated with the rates of failure and complications. The complication rate rose from 4.3 percent with one pass to 24.0 percent with more than two passes. Ultrasound guidance of subclavian-vein catheterization, as used in this study, was not beneficial. In patients at highest risk for complications and failures, catheterization should be attempted by the most experienced physicians available.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central (London )
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                2003
                28 March 2003
                : 7
                : 6
                : 397-399
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Réanimation médicale et infectieuse, Hôpital Bichat – Claude Bernard, Paris, France
                Article
                cc2179
                374364
                14624670
                1aa0c818-9a3c-4c57-a32a-bea58d632b2e
                Copyright © 2003 BioMed Central Ltd
                History
                Categories
                Commentary

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                catheter-related infection,complications,catheter,femoral,iatrogenic,subclavian,jugular,pneumothorax

                Comments

                Comment on this article