In this study, residents accidentally penetrated the posterior vessel wall of the internal jugular in a lifelike vascular access mannequin in the majority of cases. These results suggest that care must be taken even with ultrasound-guided central catheter placement and that alternative ultrasound guidance techniques, such as visualization of the vein and needle in longitudinal axis, should be considered.

No abstract

Objectives: Prediction of difficult laryngoscopy in emergency care settings is challenging. The preintubation clinical screening tests may not be applied in a large number of emergency intubations due to the patient's clinical condition. The objectives of this study were 1) to determine the utility of sonographic measurements of thickness of the tongue, anterior neck soft tissue at the level of the hyoid bone, and thyrohyoid membrane in distinguishing difficult and easy laryngoscopies and 2) to examine the association between sonographic measurements (thickness of tongue and anterior neck soft tissue) and difficult airway clinical screening tests (modified Mallampati score, thyromental distance, and interincisor gap).Methods: This was a prospective observational study at an academic medical center. Adult patients undergoing endotracheal intubation for an elective surgical procedure were included. The investigators involved in data collection were blinded to each other's assessments. Demographic variables were collected preoperatively. The clinical screening tests to predict a difficult airway were performed. The ultrasound (US) measurements of tongue and anterior neck soft tissue were obtained. The laryngoscopic view was graded using Cormack and Lehane classification by anesthesia providers on the day of surgery. To allow for comparisons between difficult airway and easy airway groups, a two-sided Student's t-test and Fisher's exact test were employed as appropriate. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were used to examine the association between screening tests and sonographic measurements. Results:The mean (±standard deviation [SD]) age of 51 eligible patients (32 female, 19 male) was 53.1 (±13.2) years. Six of the 51 patients (12%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3% to 20%) were classified as having difficult laryngoscopy by anesthesia providers. The distribution of laryngoscopy grades for all subjects was 63, 25, 4, and 8% for grades 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. In this study, 83% of subjects with difficult airways were males. No other significant differences were noted in the demographic variables and difficult airway clinical screening tests between the two groups. The sonographic measurements of anterior neck soft tissue were greater in the difficult laryngoscopy group compared to the easy laryngoscopy group at the level of the hyoid bone (1.69, 95% CI = 1.19 to 2.19 vs. 1.37, 95% CI = 1.27 to 1.46) and thyrohyoid membrane (3.47, 95% CI = 2.88 to 4.07 vs. 2.37, 95% CI = 2.29 to 2.44). No significant correlation was found between sonographic measurements and clinical screening tests.Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrated that sonographic measurements of anterior neck soft tissue thickness at the level of hyoid bone and thyrohyoid membrane can be used to distinguish difficult and easy laryngoscopies. Clinical screening tests did not correlate with US measurements, and US was able to detect difficult laryngoscopy, indicating the limitations of the conventional screening tests for predicting ...

No abstract

Venous ultrasound is the standard imaging test for patients suspected of having acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT). There is variability and disagreement among authoritative groups regarding the necessary components of the test. Some protocols include scanning the entire lower extremity, whereas others recommend scans limited to the thigh and knee supplemented with serial testing. Some protocols use gray-scale ultrasound alone, whereas others include Doppler interrogation. Point-of-care ultrasound is recommended in some settings, and there is heterogeneity of these protocols as well. Heterogeneity of recommendations can lead to errors including incorrect application of guidelines, confusion among requesting physicians, and incorrect follow-up. In October 2016, the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to evaluate the current evidence to develop recommendations regarding ultrasound protocols for DVT and the terminology used to communicate results to clinicians. Recommendations were made after open discussion and by unanimous consensus.The panel recommends a comprehensive duplex ultrasound protocol from thigh to ankle with Doppler at selected sites rather than a limited or complete compression-only examination. This protocol is currently performed in many facilities and is achievable with standard ultrasound equipment and personnel. The use of these recommendations will increase the diagnosis of calf DVT and provide better data to explain the presenting symptoms. The panel recommends a single point-of-care protocol that minimizes underdiagnoses of proximal DVT.The panel recommends the term chronic postthrombotic change to describe the residual material that persists after the acute presentation of DVT to avoid potential overtreatment of prior thrombus.Adoption of a single standardized comprehensive duplex ultrasound and a single point-of-care examination will enhance patient safety and clinicians' confidence.

In patients with difficult peripheral venous access, ultrasound guidance increased success rates of peripheral venous placement when compared with traditional techniques. However, ultrasound guidance had no effect on time to successful cannulation or number of punctures required for successful cannulation.

No abstract

Objectives: Emergency physicians (EPs) are beginning to use ultrasound (US) guidance to perform regional nerve blocks. The primary objective of this study was to compare length of stay (LOS) in patients randomized to US-guided interscalene block or procedural sedation to facilitate reduction of shoulder dislocation in the emergency department (ED). The secondary objectives were to compare one-on-one health care provider time, pain experienced by the patient during reduction, and patient satisfaction between the two groups.Methods: This was a prospective, randomized study of patients presenting to the ED with shoulder dislocation. The study was conducted at an academic Level I trauma center ED with an annual census of approximately 80,000. Patients were eligible for the study if they were at least 18 years of age and required reduction of a shoulder dislocation. A convenience sample of patients was randomized to either traditional procedural sedation or US-guided interscalene nerve block. Procedural sedation was performed with etomidate as the sole agent. Interscalene blocks were performed by hospital-credentialed EPs using sterile technique and a SonoSite MicroMaxx US machine with a high-frequency linear array transducer. Categorical variables were evaluated using Fisher's exact test, and continuous variables were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.Results: Forty-two patients were enrolled, with 21 patients randomized to each group. The groups were not significantly different with respect to sex or age. The mean (±SD) LOS in the ED was significantly higher in the procedural sedation group (177.3 ± 37.9 min) than in the US-guided interscalene block group (100.3 ± 28.2 minutes; p < 0.0001). The mean (±SD) one-on-one health care provider time was 47.1 (±9.8) minutes for the sedation group and 5 (±0.7) minutes for the US-guided interscalene block group (p < 0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in patient satisfaction or pain experienced during the procedure. There were no significant differences between groups with respect to complications such as hypoxia or hypotension (p = 0.49). Conclusions:In this study, patients undergoing shoulder dislocation reduction using US-guided interscalene block spent less time in the ED and required less one-on-one health care provider time compared to those receiving procedural sedation. There was no difference in pain level or satisfaction when compared to procedural sedation patients.