The journal of vascular access · 2020
Ultrasound-guided proximal versus distal axillary vein puncture in elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Hai-Yan, Sheng Ruan-Mei, Gao Yan-Ding, Wang Xue-Min, Zhao Wen-Biao
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided axillary vein catheterization is now widely used in hospital, but it remains uncertain whether the distal axillary vein approach is more beneficial for seniors than the proximal axillary vein approach. This study aims to compare the puncture success rate and anatomical characteristics between these two approaches.
METHODS: Senior patients requiring central venous catheterization were enrolled and randomized to the proximal axillary vein group (n = 49) or the distal axillary vein group (n = 50). Proximal axillary vein and distal axillary vein location time, venous depth, maximum diameter, and collapse index (defined as the percentage change in vein width caused by respiration) were recorded for all patients. The rate of puncture success and operation time were compared between groups.
RESULTS: Mean venous depth was 1.93 ± 0.45 cm for proximal axillary vein and 1.79 ± 0.46 cm for distal axillary vein (p < 0.001). Maximum diameter was 0.80 ± 0.33 cm for proximal axillary vein and 0.61 ± 0.33 cm for distal axillary vein (p < 0.001). Collapse indices were 20% ± 27% and 56% ± 34%, respectively (p < 0.001). Also, location time was significantly shorter for proximal axillary vein than for distal axillary vein (p < 0.001). One attempt and overall success rates were significantly higher in the proximal axillary vein group, compared with the distal axillary vein group (71.4% vs 42.0%, p = 0.003; 79.6% vs 54.0%, p = 0.007).
CONCLUSION: For catheterization under ultrasound guidance in elderly patients, the proximal axillary vein approach is superior to the distal axillary vein approach.
METHODS: Senior patients requiring central venous catheterization were enrolled and randomized to the proximal axillary vein group (n = 49) or the distal axillary vein group (n = 50). Proximal axillary vein and distal axillary vein location time, venous depth, maximum diameter, and collapse index (defined as the percentage change in vein width caused by respiration) were recorded for all patients. The rate of puncture success and operation time were compared between groups.
RESULTS: Mean venous depth was 1.93 ± 0.45 cm for proximal axillary vein and 1.79 ± 0.46 cm for distal axillary vein (p < 0.001). Maximum diameter was 0.80 ± 0.33 cm for proximal axillary vein and 0.61 ± 0.33 cm for distal axillary vein (p < 0.001). Collapse indices were 20% ± 27% and 56% ± 34%, respectively (p < 0.001). Also, location time was significantly shorter for proximal axillary vein than for distal axillary vein (p < 0.001). One attempt and overall success rates were significantly higher in the proximal axillary vein group, compared with the distal axillary vein group (71.4% vs 42.0%, p = 0.003; 79.6% vs 54.0%, p = 0.007).
CONCLUSION: For catheterization under ultrasound guidance in elderly patients, the proximal axillary vein approach is superior to the distal axillary vein approach.