Feasibility of ultrasound-based identification of correct central venous access using two acoustic windows

Zick, Günther; Elke, Gunnar; Schaedler, Dirk; Becher, Tobias; Balke, Lorenz; Weiler, Norbert

doi:10.1186/2197-425x-3-s1-a607

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our search identified and screened 4071 articles, of which 117 full-text articles were accessed for eligibility (Figure 1). 3,6–11,13,14,17–20,29–57 We retained 41 articles based on prespecified criteria for inclusion (Table 1). Regarding ultrasound guided placement and confirmation methods, 13 articles examined cardiac/vascular methods; 5 examined isolated contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS); 7 examined isolated rapid atrial swirl sign (RASS); and 13 examined combined/integrated methods (Table 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are routine chest radiographs still indicated after central line insertion? A scoping review

Brindley,

Deschamps,

Milovanovic

et al. 2024

Journal of the Intensive Care Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Central venous catheters are increasingly inserted using point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) guidance. Following insertion, it is still common to request a confirmatory chest radiograph for subclavian and internal jugular lines, at least outside of the operating theater. This scoping review addresses: (i) the justification for routine post-insertion radiographs, (ii) whether it would better to use post-insertion POCUS instead, and (iii) the perceived barriers to change. Methods: We searched the electronic databases, Ovid MEDLINE (1946-) and Ovid EMBASE (1974-), using the MESH terms (“Echography” OR “Ultrasonography” OR “Ultrasound”) AND “Central Venous Catheter” up until February 2023. We also searched clinical practice guidelines, and targeted literature, including cited and citing articles. We included adults (⩾18 years) and English and French language publications. We included randomized control trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, systematic reviews, and surveys. Results: Four thousand seventy-one articles were screened, 117 full-text articles accessed, and 41 retained. Thirteen examined cardiac/vascular methods; 5 examined isolated contrast-enhanced ultrasonography; 7 examined isolated rapid atrial swirl sign; and 13 examined combined/integrated methods. In addition, three systematic reviews/meta-analyses and one survey addressed barriers to POCUS adoption. Discussion: We believe that the literature supports retiring the routine post-central line chest radiograph. This is not only because POCUS has made line insertion safer, but because POCUS performs at least as well, and is associated with less radiation, lower cost, time savings, and greater accuracy. There has been less written about perceived barriers to change, but the literature shows that these concerns- which include upfront costs, time-to-train, medicolegal concerns and habit- can be challenged and hence overcome.

show abstract