Clinical Utility of Ultrasonographic Guidance for Arterial Catheterization in Patients with Obesity: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Hsiang-Ling Wu, Yu-Ming Wu, Chien-Wun Wang, Yen-Hao Su, Juan P Cata, Jui-Tai Chen, Yih-Giun Cherng, Ying-Hsuan Tai
{"title":"Clinical Utility of Ultrasonographic Guidance for Arterial Catheterization in Patients with Obesity: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Hsiang-Ling Wu, Yu-Ming Wu, Chien-Wun Wang, Yen-Hao Su, Juan P Cata, Jui-Tai Chen, Yih-Giun Cherng, Ying-Hsuan Tai","doi":"10.1053/j.jvca.2024.08.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the success and complication rates of radial artery catheterization using ultrasound guidance versus the conventional palpation technique in obese patients by anesthesia residents with similar levels of experience in both methods, and to measure the skin-to-artery distance of radial, brachial, and dorsalis pedis arteries using ultrasound with standardized anatomic landmarks.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective, randomized controlled trial SETTING: Single tertiary center PARTICIPANTS: Eighty adults with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m<sup>2</sup> INTERVENTIONS: Ultrasound guidance or conventional palpation method MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate of arterial catheterization. The skin-to-artery distance of the radial artery was significantly greater in the BMI groups of 40 to 49 kg/m<sup>2</sup> and ≥50 kg/m<sup>2</sup> compared to the BMI group of 30 to 39 kg/m<sup>2</sup> (mean difference, 1.0 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-1.7; p = 0.0029) for BMI 40-49 kg/m<sup>2</sup> vs 30-39 kg/m<sup>2</sup> and 1.5 mm (95% CI, 0.6-2.4 mm; p = 0.0015) for ≥50 kg/m<sup>2</sup> vs 30-39 kg/m<sup>2</sup>. Similar findings were observed for the brachial artery. BMI was inversely associated with first-attempt success rates (p = 0.0145) and positively with time to successful catheterization (p = 0.0271). The first-attempt success and vascular complication rates of catheterization did not differ significantly between the ultrasound guidance group (65.0% and 52.5%, respectively) and the conventional palpation group (70.0% [p = 0.6331] and 57.5% [p = 0.6531], respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study do not support the routine use of ultrasonography during radial arterial catheterizations for obese adults when junior practitioners perform the procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":15176,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2024.08.006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the success and complication rates of radial artery catheterization using ultrasound guidance versus the conventional palpation technique in obese patients by anesthesia residents with similar levels of experience in both methods, and to measure the skin-to-artery distance of radial, brachial, and dorsalis pedis arteries using ultrasound with standardized anatomic landmarks.

Design: Prospective, randomized controlled trial SETTING: Single tertiary center PARTICIPANTS: Eighty adults with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 INTERVENTIONS: Ultrasound guidance or conventional palpation method MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate of arterial catheterization. The skin-to-artery distance of the radial artery was significantly greater in the BMI groups of 40 to 49 kg/m2 and ≥50 kg/m2 compared to the BMI group of 30 to 39 kg/m2 (mean difference, 1.0 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-1.7; p = 0.0029) for BMI 40-49 kg/m2 vs 30-39 kg/m2 and 1.5 mm (95% CI, 0.6-2.4 mm; p = 0.0015) for ≥50 kg/m2 vs 30-39 kg/m2. Similar findings were observed for the brachial artery. BMI was inversely associated with first-attempt success rates (p = 0.0145) and positively with time to successful catheterization (p = 0.0271). The first-attempt success and vascular complication rates of catheterization did not differ significantly between the ultrasound guidance group (65.0% and 52.5%, respectively) and the conventional palpation group (70.0% [p = 0.6331] and 57.5% [p = 0.6531], respectively).

Conclusion: The results of this study do not support the routine use of ultrasonography during radial arterial catheterizations for obese adults when junior practitioners perform the procedure.

肥胖症患者动脉导管超声引导的临床实用性:随机对照试验
目的比较在肥胖患者中使用超声引导和传统触诊技术进行桡动脉导管插入术的成功率和并发症发生率,两种方法的经验水平相近的麻醉住院医师使用超声测量桡动脉、肱动脉和足背动脉的皮-动脉距离:设计:前瞻性随机对照试验 设定:单个三级中心单个三级医疗中心 参与者: 80 名体重指数为 0.5 的成年人:体重指数(BMI)≥30 kg/m2 的 80 名成人:测量和主要结果:主要结果是首次尝试动脉导管插入术的成功率。BMI 40-49 kg/m2 vs 30-39 kg/m2 组与 BMI 30-39 kg/m2 组相比,40-49 kg/m2 组和≥50 kg/m2 组的桡动脉皮肤到动脉的距离明显大于 30-39 kg/m2 组(平均差异为 1.0 mm;95% 置信区间 [CI],0.4-1.7;p = 0.0029);≥50 kg/m2 vs 30-39 kg/m2 组的平均差异为 1.5 mm(95% 置信区间,0.6-2.4 mm;p = 0.0015)。肱动脉也观察到类似的结果。体重指数与首次尝试成功率成反比(p = 0.0145),与成功导管插入时间成正比(p = 0.0271)。超声引导组(分别为 65.0% 和 52.5%)和传统触诊组(分别为 70.0% [p = 0.6331] 和 57.5% [p=0.6531])的导管插入首次尝试成功率和血管并发症发生率没有显著差异:本研究的结果不支持初级医师在为肥胖成人进行桡动脉导管插入术时常规使用超声波检查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
17.90%
发文量
606
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia is primarily aimed at anesthesiologists who deal with patients undergoing cardiac, thoracic or vascular surgical procedures. JCVA features a multidisciplinary approach, with contributions from cardiac, vascular and thoracic surgeons, cardiologists, and other related specialists. Emphasis is placed on rapid publication of clinically relevant material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信