Cross‐sectional internal diameters of human cervical and femoral blood vessels: Relationship to subject's sex, age, body size

Abstract

Cross-sectional internal diameter measurements were made of right and left common carotid and right femoral arteries and right and left internal jugular, superficial femoral, and common femoral veins in 32 normal human subjects utilizing duplex ultrasonography. The relationships of these vessel sizes to the subject's sex, age, height, weight, and body surface area were analyzed statistically; and graphs were constructed, indicating the relationship of blood vessel diameters to the various body size parameters. Findings indicate that 1) for the femoral veins, body surface area had the best correlation with the internal diameter of the vein; 2) for the right internal jugular vein, body weight had the best correlation with the internal diameter of the vein; 3) correlation between vein diameter and body size of the subject is better for the femoral veins than for the internal jugular veins; 4) internal diameter of the femoral and internal jugular veins increases about 20% when they are distended by 15 degrees of positional inclination of the subject's body; 5) neither age nor sex of the subject influences the positional distensibility of the veins examined; 6) the cross-sectional internal diameter of the femoral and internal jugular veins, as determined by duplex ultrasonography, closely relates to the external diameter of these vessels as measured by direct in vivo application of calipers and to the maximum outside diameter of cannula the vessel will accept.

Ultrasound-guided central venous catheter placement increases success rates in pediatric patients: a meta-analysis

“…The rate of accidental carotid artery puncture was also higher among children <16.3 kg in both US (15.4 vs. 3.0%) and LM groups (24.5 vs. 12.5%), compared to children >16.3 kg (13). The difficulty in achieving successful cannulation among neonates can be attributed in part to the small diameter of the vessels, making it difficult to locate even under US visualization (17). Mortensen et al (17) reported correlations between body weight and surface area with vein diameter, with a stronger correlation for femoral veins compared to internal jugular veins.…”

The sizes of internal jugular veins in Turkish children aged between 7 and 12 years

“…There may be diagnostic problems in pediatric patients who present with phlebectasia mimicking other neck masses [5,6]. In the literature, there are many studies about the sizes and cross-sectional area of the IJV, aiming at guiding both the interventional medical procedures and also the diagnosis of vascular pathologies like phlebectesia [1,2,[7][8][9][10]. Mortensen et al [1] measured the cross-sectional internal diameters of IJVs in a study they performed in cervical and femoral vessels.…”

“…In the literature, there are many studies about the sizes and cross-sectional area of the IJV, aiming at guiding both the interventional medical procedures and also the diagnosis of vascular pathologies like phlebectesia [1,2,[7][8][9][10]. Mortensen et al [1] measured the cross-sectional internal diameters of IJVs in a study they performed in cervical and femoral vessels. Jeon et al [9] compared the diameters of internal jugular phlebectasia with diameters of IJVs in normal children.…”

“…Currently, intravascular interventional procedures via IJV are frequently performed. IJV may have variable sizes in adults [1]. Small size of the IJV may contribute to difficulty in cannulation with an increased chance of failure or complication [2].…”

Prediction of a small internal jugular vein by external jugular vein diameter

“…The IJV is of variable size in adults and correlates poorly with other measurable physiological dimensions such as neck circumference. Internal jugular vein diameter has been shown to be weakly related to that of the femoral vein [4], but this observation is of limited use in the clinical situation. It has been stated that the external jugular vein (EJV) bears an inverse relationship in size to the other veins in the neck [5].…”