Decrease in central venous catheter placement due to use of ultrasound guidance for peripheral intravenous catheters.

STUDY OBJECTIVES Obtaining intravenous (IV) access in the emergency department (ED) can be especially challenging, and physicians often resort to placement of central venous catheters (CVCs). Use of ultrasound-guided peripheral IV catheters (USGPIVs) can prevent many "unnecessary" CVCs, but the true impact of USGPIVs has never been quantified. This study set out to determine the reduction in CVCs by USGPIV placement. METHODS This was a prospective, observational study conducted in 2 urban EDs. Patients who were to undergo placement of a CVC due to inability to establish IV access by other methods were enrolled. Ultrasound-trained physicians then attempted USGPIV placement. Patients were followed up for up to 7 days to assess for CVC placement and related complications. RESULTS One hundred patients were enrolled and underwent USGPIV placement. Ultrasound-guided peripheral IV catheters were initially successfully placed in all patients but failed in 12 patients (12.0%; 95 confidence interval [CI], 7.0%-19.8%) before ED disposition, resulting in 4 central lines, 7 repeated USGPIVs, and 1 patient requiring no further intervention. Through the inpatient follow-up period, another 11 patients underwent CVC placement, resulting in a total of 15 CVCs (15.0%; 95 CI, 9.3%-23.3%) placed. Of the 15 patients who did receive a CVC, 1 patient developed a catheter-related infection, resulting in a 6.7% (95 CI, 1.2%-29.8%) complication rate. CONCLUSION Ultrasound prevented the need for CVC placement in 85% of patients with difficult IV access. This suggests that USGPIVs have the potential to reduce morbidity in this patient population.

[1]  M Gebel,et al.  A sonographically guided technique for central venous access. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  W. Satz,et al.  Ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous access versus traditional approaches in patients with difficult intravenous access. , 2005, Annals of emergency medicine.

[3]  Darren Braude,et al.  Ultrasound-guidance vs. standard technique in difficult vascular access patients by ED technicians. , 2009, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[4]  John K. Iglehart,et al.  The Centers for Disease Control , 1983 .

[5]  R. Niska,et al.  National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2006 emergency department summary. , 2008, National health statistics reports.

[6]  S. Adhikari,et al.  Comparison of Infection Rates Among Ultrasound‐Guided Versus Traditionally Placed Peripheral Intravenous Lines , 2010, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[7]  Sanjay Saint,et al.  Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. , 2002, American journal of infection control.

[8]  W. Satz,et al.  Ultrasound-guided peripheral venous access vs. the external jugular vein as the initial approach to the patient with difficult vascular access. , 2010, The Journal of emergency medicine.

[9]  E. Winslow,et al.  Variables influencing intravenous catheter insertion difficulty and failure: an analysis of 339 intravenous catheter insertions. , 2005, Heart & lung : the journal of critical care.

[10]  Dan M. Kluger,et al.  The risk of bloodstream infection in adults with different intravascular devices: a systematic review of 200 published prospective studies. , 2006, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[11]  M. Blaivas,et al.  Emergency nurses' utilization of ultrasound guidance for placement of peripheral intravenous lines in difficult-access patients. , 2004, Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

[12]  K. Boniface,et al.  ED technicians can successfully place ultrasound-guided intravenous catheters in patients with poor vascular access. , 2011, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[13]  Lorri A. Lee,et al.  Injuries and Liability Related to Central Vascular Catheters: A Closed Claims Analysis , 2004, Anesthesiology.

[14]  E. Snoey,et al.  Ultrasound-guided brachial and basilic vein cannulation in emergency department patients with difficult intravenous access. , 1999, Annals of emergency medicine.

[15]  A G Randolph,et al.  Ultrasound guidance for placement of central venous catheters: a meta-analysis of the literature. , 1996, Critical care medicine.

[16]  J. Feldman,et al.  Ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous catheter survival in ED patients with difficult access. , 2010, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[17]  P. Ishimine,et al.  Randomized Controlled Trial of Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Placement Versus Traditional Techniques in Difficult-Access Pediatric Patients , 2009, Pediatric emergency care.

[18]  R. Niska,et al.  National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2007 emergency department summary. , 2010, National health statistics reports.

[19]  G. de Filippi,et al.  Standard-length catheters vs long catheters in ultrasound-guided peripheral vein cannulation. , 2012, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[20]  Michael K Gould,et al.  Preventing complications of central venous catheterization. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.