Ultrasound-guided "short" midline catheters for difficult venous access in the emergency department: a retrospective analysis

Giancarlo Scoppettuolo, Mauro Pittiruti, Sara Pitoni, Laura Dolcetti, Alessandro Emoli, Alessandro Mitidieri, Ivano Migliorini, Maria Giuseppina Annetta, Giancarlo Scoppettuolo, Mauro Pittiruti, Sara Pitoni, Laura Dolcetti, Alessandro Emoli, Alessandro Mitidieri, Ivano Migliorini, Maria Giuseppina Annetta

Abstract

Background: Acutely ill patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) constantly require at least one fast and reliable peripheral intravenous (PIV) access. In many conditions (morbid obesity, underweight state, chronic diseases, intravenous drug abuse, adverse local conditions, etc.), PIV placement may be challenging. Ultrasound guidance is a useful tool for obtaining a peripheral intravenous access in the emergency department, particularly when superficial veins are difficult to identify by palpation and direct visualization, though standard peripheral intravenous cannulas are not ideal for this technique of insertion and may have limited duration. Long polyurethane catheters inserted with ultrasound guidance and direct Seldinger technique appear to have several advantages over short cannulas in terms of success of insertion and of duration.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on all the ultrasound-guided peripheral venous accesses obtained by insertion of long polyurethane catheters in patients admitted to the emergency department of our university hospital during 1 year. The main indication to the procedure was the urgent need of a peripheral venous access in patients with superficial veins difficult to palpate and/or visualize. All relevant data concerning the insertion and the maintenance of these peripheral lines were collected from the chart.

Results: Seventy-six patients were included in this review. The success rate of insertion was 100 %, with an average of 1.57 punctures per each successful cannulation. The mean time needed for the complete procedure was 9.5 min. In 73 % of patients, the catheter was used for more than 1 week; a minority of catheters were removed prematurely for end of use. No major infective or thrombotic complication was reported.

Conclusions: In our experience, 8- to 10-cm-long polyurethane catheters may offer a fast and reliable peripheral venous access in the emergency department, if placed by ultrasound guidance and with the Seldinger technique. Further studies with prospective, randomized, and controlled design are warranted to confirm our results.

Keywords: Emergency department; Midline catheters; Peripheral intravenous access; Polyurethane catheters; Ultrasound guide.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Eight-centimeter polyurethane catheter + 20G needle + 20-cm straight tip guide wire
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
a US identification of the vein in short axis. b US-guided “out-of-plane” venipuncture. c Successful venipuncture is confirmed by blood reflux. d Guide wire threaded through the needle
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
a Removal of the needle. b Insertion of the catheter over the guide wire. c Intravenous placement confirmed by blood return. d Final dressing

References

    1. Sebbane M, Claret PG, Lefebvre S, Mercier G, Rubenovitch J, Jreige R, et al. Predicting peripheral venous access difficulty in the emergency department using body mass index and a clinical evaluation of venous accessibility. J Emerg Med. 2013;31(1):299–305. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.07.051.
    1. Juvin P, Blarel A, Bruno F, Desmonts JM. Is peripheral line placement more difficult in obese than in lean patients? Anesth Analg. 2003;96:1218. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000050570.85195.29.
    1. McGee DC, Gould MK. Preventing complications of central venous catheterization. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1123–33. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra011883.
    1. Oliver W, Nuttall G, Beynen F. The incidence of artery puncture with central venous cannulation using a modified technique for detection and prevention of arterial cannulation. J Cardiothoac Vasc Anesth. 1997;11:851–5. doi: 10.1016/S1053-0770(97)90119-1.
    1. LeMaster CH, Schuur JD, Pandya D, Pallin DJ, Silvia J, Yokoe D, et al. Infection and natural history of emergency department-placed central venous catheters. Ann Emerg Med. 2010;56(5):492–7. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.05.033.
    1. Constantino TG, Parikh AK, Satz WA, Fojtik JP. Ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous access versus traditional approaches in patients with difficult intravenous access. Ann Emerg Med. 2005;46:456–61. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.12.026.
    1. Brannam L, Blaivas M, Lyon M, Flake M. Emergency nurses’ utilization of ultrasound guidance for placement of peripheral intravenous lines in difficult-access patients. Acad Emerg Med. 2004;11:1361–3. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2004.tb01929.x.
    1. Mills CN, Liebmann O, Stone MB, Frazee BW. Ultrasonographically guided insertion of a 15-cm catheter into the deep brachial or basilic vein in patients with difficult intravenous access. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;50:68–72. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.02.003.
    1. Resnick JR, Cydulka RK, Donato J, Jones RA, Werner SL. Success of ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access with skin marking. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15:723–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00174.x.
    1. Keyes LE, Frazee BW, Snoey ER, Simon BC, Christy D. Ultrasound-guided brachial and basilic vein cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access. Ann Emerg Med. 1999;34:711–4. doi: 10.1016/S0196-0644(99)70095-8.
    1. Witting MD, Schenkel SM, Lawner BJ, Euerle BD. Effects of vein width and depth on ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous success rates. J Emerg Med. 2010;39(1):70–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2009.01.003.
    1. Panebianco NL, Fredette JM, Szyld D, Sagalyn EB, PInes JM, Dean AJ. What you see (sonographically) is what you get: vein and patient characteristics associated with successful ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous placement in patients with difficult access. Acad Em Med. 2009;16:1298–303. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00520.x.
    1. Fields JM, Dean AJ, Todman RW, Au AK, Anderson KL, Ku BS, et al. The effect of vessel depth, diameter, and location on ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter longevity. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30(7):1134–40. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2011.07.027.
    1. Egan G, Healy D, O’Neill H, Clarke-Moloney M, Grace PA, Walsh SR. Ultrasound guidance for difficult peripheral venous access: systematic review and meta-analysis. Emerg Med J. 2013;30(7):521–6. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2012-201652.
    1. Liu YT, Alsaawi A, Bjomsson HM. Ultrasound guided peripheral venous access: a systematic review of randomized controlled-trials. Eur J Emerg Med. 2014;21(1):18–23.
    1. Schoenfeld E, Shokooi H, Boniface K. Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access in the emergency department: patient-centered survey. West Jour Em Med. 2011;4:475–7. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2011.3.1920.
    1. Au AK, Rotte MJ, Grzybowski RJ, Ku BS, Fields JM. Decrease in central venous catheter placement due to use of ultrasound guidance for peripheral intravenous catheters. Am J Emerg Med. 2012;30(9):1950–4. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2012.04.016.
    1. Lamperti M, Bodenham AR, Pittiruti M, Blaivas M, Augoustides JG, Elbarbary M, et al. International evidence-based recommendations on ultrasound-guided vascular access. Int Care Med. 2012;38(7):1105–17. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2597-x.
    1. Dargin JM, Rebholz CM, Lowenstein RA, Mithcell PM, Feldman JA. Ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous catheter survival in ED patients with difficult access. Am J Em Med. 2010;28:1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2008.09.001.
    1. Maki DG, Ringer M. Risk factors for infusion-related phlebitis with small peripheral venous catheters. A randomized controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1991;114(10):845–54. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-114-10-845.
    1. Karadağ A, Görgülü S. Effect of two different short peripheral catheter materials on phlebitis development. J Intraven Nurs. 2000;23(3):158–66.
    1. Campbell L. IV-related phlebitis, complications and length of hospital stay. Br J Nur. 1998;7:1364–73. doi: 10.12968/bjon.1998.7.22.5533.
    1. Cicolini G, Bonghi AP, Di Labio L, Di Mascio R. Position of peripheral venous cannulae and the incidence of thrombophlebitis: an observational study. J Adv Nurs. 2009;65(6):1268–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.04980.x.
    1. Hamilton H. Complications associated with venous access devices: part two. Nurs Stand. 2006;20(27):59–65. doi: 10.7748/ns2006.03.20.27.59.c4095.
    1. Tagalakis V, Kahn SR, Libman M, Blostein M. The epidemiology of peripheral vein infusion thrombophlebitis: a critical review. Am J Med. 2002;113:146–51. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9343(02)01163-4.
    1. Adhikari S, Blaivas M, Morrison D. Comparison of infection rates among ultrasound guided and blindly placed peripheral intravenous lines. Acad Emerg Med. 2007;14(5):S100. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2007.03.979.
    1. Kerforne T, Petitpas F, Frasca D, Goudet V, Robert R, Mimoz O. Ultrasound-guided peripheral venous access in severely ill patients with suspected difficult vascular puncture. Chest. 2012;141(1):279–80. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-2054.
    1. Gregg SC, Murthi SB, Sisley AC, Stein DM, Scalea TM. Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous access in the intensive care unit. J Crit Care. 2010;25(3):514–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2009.09.003.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다