Comparison of a Novel Geometric Landmark Method Versus Conventional Palpation Technique for Central Venous Cannulation: A Comparative Observational Study of Two Techniques.
Muhammad Arslan Zahid, Ahmed Arslan Shahbaz, Dawood Hasan Khan, Maqsood Ahmed Siddiqui, Wajid Ali, Akbar Mistry
{"title":"Comparison of a Novel Geometric Landmark Method Versus Conventional Palpation Technique for Central Venous Cannulation: A Comparative Observational Study of Two Techniques.","authors":"Muhammad Arslan Zahid, Ahmed Arslan Shahbaz, Dawood Hasan Khan, Maqsood Ahmed Siddiqui, Wajid Ali, Akbar Mistry","doi":"10.4103/aca.aca_43_26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effectiveness and safety of a novel geometric landmark technique with the conventional palpation technique for central venous cannulation.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Comparative observational study.</p><p><strong>Place and duration of the study: </strong>This study was conducted at National Medical Centre (NMC) from January 01, 2025 to June 30, 2025.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":7997,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia","volume":"29 4","pages":"503-509"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.aca_43_26","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/10/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
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.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia (ACA) is the official journal of the Indian Association of Cardiovascular Thoracic Anaesthesiologists. The journal is indexed with PubMed/MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica/EMBASE, IndMed and MedInd. The journal’s full text is online at www.annals.in. With the aim of faster and better dissemination of knowledge, we will be publishing articles ‘Ahead of Print’ immediately on acceptance. In addition, the journal would allow free access (Open Access) to its contents, which is likely to attract more readers and citations to articles published in ACA. Authors do not have to pay for submission, processing or publication of articles in ACA.