Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 6853 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 15  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 395-400

Central venous access in neonates: Comparison of ultrasound-guided percutaneous access and minimal surgical open methods


1 Department of Anaesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
2 Department of Pediatric Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Hani I Taman
Department of Anaesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura; 23 Clos Coed Colling, Swansea, SA2 7RD
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/aer.aer_138_21

Rights and Permissions

Background: In neonates, percutaneous central venous catheter (CVC) insertion is often a challenging technique. Recent reports have reported the efficacy of ultrasound (US) guidance when performing such an intervention. We conducted this study to compare US-guided and minimal surgical CVC insertion regarding time and ease of insertion, reliability, and complications. Patients and Methods: This prospective randomized study included 92 neonates scheduled for CVC insertion. They were divided into two groups: Group A (46 neonates) underwent the US-guided approach and Group B (46 neonates) underwent the surgical approach. The number of attempts and the duration of the procedure were documented in both groups. In addition, intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded. Results: Each of patient's age, gender, weight, and the indication of catheter insertion were statistically comparable between the two groups. The number of trials showed a significant increase in Group A (1.52 vs. 1.07 in Group Bp <0.001). Nevertheless, the time of the procedure was significantly decreased in the same group (3.68 vs. 10.21 in Group Bp <0.001). [Table 2] summarizes the previous findings. Failure was encountered only in one case in Group A (2.2%), which was converted to the open surgical technique. In general, the incidence of complications showed no significant difference between the two approaches. Conclusion: Although US-guided CVC insertion is associated with an increased number of trials, the duration of the procedure is significantly diminished with its use. Furthermore, it has a high success rate in addition to a comparable complication profile with the traditional surgical method.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed280    
    Printed9    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded41    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal