The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
1972
DOI: 10.1016/s0003-4975(10)65181-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Current Status of Infraclavicular Subclavian Vein Catheterization

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
22
0
2

Year Published

1978
1978
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 103 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
22
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…An evaluation of the techniques currently in use shows that the conventional technique of infraclavicular subclavian vein catheterization eliminates the neurovascular complications encountered in catheterizing the internal jugular vein, though it carries the risk of subclavian artery puncture and a high risk of significant late stenosis (Borja, 1972). The latter complication is thought to result from the pressure of the catheter on the caudal aspect of the subclavian vein as it bends to enter the superior vena cava (Barrett et al, 1988;Schillinger et al, 1991).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…An evaluation of the techniques currently in use shows that the conventional technique of infraclavicular subclavian vein catheterization eliminates the neurovascular complications encountered in catheterizing the internal jugular vein, though it carries the risk of subclavian artery puncture and a high risk of significant late stenosis (Borja, 1972). The latter complication is thought to result from the pressure of the catheter on the caudal aspect of the subclavian vein as it bends to enter the superior vena cava (Barrett et al, 1988;Schillinger et al, 1991).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Complication rates range between 0.1-10% (Seneff, 1991). Acute complications, with an incidence of 7.2%, are incurred during catheter insertion and are basically iatrogenic (Davidson et al, 1963;Yarom, 1964;Yoffa, 1965;Borja, 1972;Ryan et al, 1974;Voegele, 1976;Herbst, 1978;Goutail-Flaud et al, 1991;Yerdel et al, 1991a,b;Ballard et al, 1992).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 1979, the peelaway sheath was introduced, and this simplified the percutaneous subclavian placement of pacemaker leads [3]. Although there were substantial risks related to subclavian vein cannulation [4], this became the most popular method for implantation of permanent pacemakers [5], because it was speedy and relatively atraumatic, and suitable for the placement of multiple leads.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, frequent use of central venous catheters has resulted in an increased documentation of air embolism through intravenous equipment over the last 30 years. [7][8][9][10] Therapeutic and diagnostic automated intravenous infusion devices are probably responsible for a small percentage of VAE through intravenous catheters, with most occurring during placement, use, and removal of central venous lines. Table 26.1 lists the ever-broadening clinical settings in which VGE has been reported.…”
Section: Venous Gas Embolism Historical Perspective and Etiologymentioning
confidence: 99%