Annals of cardiac anaesthesia · 2026
Comparison of a Novel Geometric Landmark Method Versus Conventional Palpation Technique for Central Venous Cannulation: A Comparative Observational Study of Two Techniques.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Zahid Muhammad Arslan, Shahbaz Ahmed Arslan, Khan Dawood Hasan, Siddiqui Maqsood Ahmed, Ali Wajid, Mistry Akbar
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of a novel geometric landmark technique with the conventional palpation technique for central venous cannulation.
STUDY DESIGN: Comparative observational study.
PLACE AND DURATION OF THE STUDY: This study was conducted at National Medical Centre (NMC) from January 01, 2025 to June 30, 2025.
METHODS: A total of 100 adult patients requiring central venous cannulation were enrolled and allocated into two groups based on the technique used. Group A (n = 50) underwent cannulation using the geometric landmark method, while Group B (n = 50) underwent cannulation using the conventional palpation technique. First-attempt success rate was the main outcome. Secondary outcomes were the number of attempts, arterial puncture, and change of technique. SPSS software was used for analysis. Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables whereas the Mann-Whitney U test was applied to the non-normally distributed continuous variables. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: First-attempt success was significantly higher in the geometric landmark group compared to the palpation group (98% vs. 86%; P = 0.027). The geometric landmark technique was associated with fewer cannulation attempts (mean 1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.18 ± 0.57; P = 0.012). Arterial puncture occurred in one patient (2%) in each group, with no statistically significant difference (P = 1.000). Technique change was required in one patient (2%) in each group, with no statistically significant difference between the two techniques (P = 1.000). The two groups had similar baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.
CONCLUSION: The geometric landmark technique significantly improves first-attempt success and reduces the number of cannulation attempts compared with the conventional palpation method while maintaining a comparable safety profile. This technique represents a practical and cost-effective alternative for central venous cannulation, particularly in resource-limited settings.
STUDY DESIGN: Comparative observational study.
PLACE AND DURATION OF THE STUDY: This study was conducted at National Medical Centre (NMC) from January 01, 2025 to June 30, 2025.
METHODS: A total of 100 adult patients requiring central venous cannulation were enrolled and allocated into two groups based on the technique used. Group A (n = 50) underwent cannulation using the geometric landmark method, while Group B (n = 50) underwent cannulation using the conventional palpation technique. First-attempt success rate was the main outcome. Secondary outcomes were the number of attempts, arterial puncture, and change of technique. SPSS software was used for analysis. Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables whereas the Mann-Whitney U test was applied to the non-normally distributed continuous variables. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: First-attempt success was significantly higher in the geometric landmark group compared to the palpation group (98% vs. 86%; P = 0.027). The geometric landmark technique was associated with fewer cannulation attempts (mean 1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.18 ± 0.57; P = 0.012). Arterial puncture occurred in one patient (2%) in each group, with no statistically significant difference (P = 1.000). Technique change was required in one patient (2%) in each group, with no statistically significant difference between the two techniques (P = 1.000). The two groups had similar baseline demographic and clinical characteristics.
CONCLUSION: The geometric landmark technique significantly improves first-attempt success and reduces the number of cannulation attempts compared with the conventional palpation method while maintaining a comparable safety profile. This technique represents a practical and cost-effective alternative for central venous cannulation, particularly in resource-limited settings.