Central Venous Catheterization: Are We Using Ultrasound Guidance?

Point-of-care Ultrasound-guided Central Venous Catheter Confirmation in Ultrasound Nonexperts

OBJECTIVE

Emerging evidence suggests that chest radiography (CXR) following central venous catheter (CVC) placement is unnecessary when point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is used to confirm catheter position and exclude pneumothorax. However, few providers have adopted this practice, and it is unknown what contributing factors may play a role in this lack of adoption, such as ultrasound experience. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS to confirm CVC position and exclude a pneumothorax after brief education and training of nonexperts.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study in a single academic medical center to determine the diagnostic characteristics of a POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol after brief training performed by POCUS nonexperts. POCUS nonexperts (emergency medicine senior residents and critical care fellows) independently performed a POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol after a 30-minute didactic training. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of the POCUS-guided CVC confirmation protocol for malposition and pneumothorax detection. Secondary outcomes were efficiency and feasibility of adequate image acquisition, adjudicated by POCUS experts.

RESULTS

Twenty-six POCUS nonexperts collected data on 190 patients in the final analysis. There were five (2.5%) CVC malpositions and six (3%) pneumothoraxes on CXR. The positive likelihood ratios of POCUS for malposition detection and pneumothorax were 12.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.26 to 46.69) and 3.41 (95% CI = 0.51 to 22.76), respectively. The accuracy of POCUS for pneumothorax detection compared to CXR was 0.93 (95% CI = 0.88 to 0.96) and the sensitivity was 0.17 (95% CI = 0.00 to 0.64). The median (interquartile range) time for CVC confirmation was lower for POCUS (9 minutes [8.5-9.5 minutes]) compared to CXR (29 minutes [1-269 minutes]; Mann-Whitney U, p < 0.01). Adequate protocol image acquisition was achieved in 76% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Thirty-minute training of POCUS in nonexperts demonstrates adequate diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and feasibility of POCUS-guided CVC position confirmation, but not exclusion of pneumothorax.

Practice Patterns of Central Venous Catheter Placement and Confirmation in Pediatric Critical Care

Optimal practices for the placement of central venous catheters (CVCs) in critically ill children are unclear. This study describes the clinical practice of pediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) providers regarding CVC placement, including site selection, confirmation practices and assessment of complications. Two-hundred fourteen PCCM providers responded to an electronic survey, including 170 (79%) attending physicians, 30 (14%) fellow physicians, and 14 (7%) advanced practice providers. PCCM providers most commonly place internal jugular (IJ) and femoral CVCs, with subclavian CVCs and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) placed less commonly (IJ 99%, femoral 95%, subclavian 40%, PICC 19%). The IJ is the most preferred site (128/214 (60%)); decreased infection risk is the most common reason for preferring this site. The subclavian is the least preferred site (150/214 [70%]) due to concern for increased risk of complications (51%) and personal discomfort with the procedure (49%). One-hundred twenty-six (59%) of respondents reported receiving formal ultrasound (US) or echocardiography training. Respondents reported using dynamic US guidance for placement in 90% of IJ, 86% of PICC, 78% of femoral, and 12% of subclavian CVCs. Plain radiography (X-ray) was the most preferred modality for confirming CVC tip position (85%) compared with US (9%) and no imaging (5%). Most providers reported using X-ray to evaluate for pneumothorax following upper extremity CVC placement, with only 5% reporting use of US and none relying on physical exam alone. This study demonstrates wide variability in PCCM providers' CVC placement practices. Potential training gaps exist for placement of subclavian catheters and use of US.

Recommendations on the Use of Ultrasound Guidance for Central and Peripheral Vascular Access in Adults: A Position Statement of the Society of Hospital Medicine

PREPROCEDURE

1)We recommend that providers should be familiar with the operation of their specific ultrasound machine prior to initiation of a vascular access procedure. 2)We recommend that providers should use a high-frequency linear transducer with a sterile sheath and sterile gel to perform vascular access procedures. 3)We recommend that providers should use two-dimensional ultrasound to evaluate for anatomical variations and absence of vascular thrombosis during preprocedural site selection. 4)We recommend that providers should evaluate the target blood vessel size and depth during preprocedural ultrasound evaluation.

TECHNIQUES

General Techniques 5) We recommend that providers should avoid using static ultrasound alone to mark the needle insertion site for vascular access procedures. 6)We recommend that providers should use real-time (dynamic), two-dimensional ultrasound guidance with a high-frequency linear transducer for central venous catheter (CVC) insertion, regardless of the provider's level of experience. 7)We suggest using either a transverse (short-axis) or longitudinal (long-axis) approach when performing real-time ultrasound-guided vascular access procedures. 8)We recommend that providers should visualize the needle tip and guidewire in the target vein prior to vessel dilatation. 9)To increase the success rate of ultrasound-guided vascular access procedures, we recommend that providers should utilize echogenic needles, plastic needle guides, and/or ultrasound beam steering when available. Central Venous Access Techniques 10) We recommend that providers should use a standardized procedure checklist that includes the use of real-time ultrasound guidance to reduce the risk of central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) from CVC insertion. 11)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance, combined with aseptic technique and maximal sterile barrier precautions, to reduce the incidence of infectious complications from CVC insertion. 12)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for internal jugular vein catheterization, which reduces the risk of mechanical and infectious complications, the number of needle passes, and time to cannulation and increases overall procedure success rates. 13)We recommend that providers who routinely insert subclavian vein CVCs should use real-time ultrasound guidance, which has been shown to reduce the risk of mechanical complications and number of needle passes and increase overall procedure success rates compared with landmark-based techniques. 14)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for femoral venous access, which has been shown to reduce the risk of arterial punctures and total procedure time and increase overall procedure success rates. Peripheral Venous Access Techniques 15) We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for the insertion of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs), which is associated with higher procedure success rates and may be more cost effective compared with landmark-based techniques. 16)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for the placement of peripheral intravenous lines (PIV) in patients with difficult peripheral venous access to reduce the total procedure time, needle insertion attempts, and needle redirections. Ultrasound-guided PIV insertion is also an effective alternative to CVC insertion in patients with difficult venous access. 17)We suggest using real-time ultrasound guidance to reduce the risk of vascular, infectious, and neurological complications during PIV insertion, particularly in patients with difficult venous access. Arterial Access Techniques 18)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for arterial access, which has been shown to increase first-pass success rates, reduce the time to cannulation, and reduce the risk of hematoma development compared with landmark-based techniques. 19)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for femoral arterial access, which has been shown to increase first-pass success rates and reduce the risk of vascular complications. 20)We recommend that providers should use real-time ultrasound guidance for radial arterial access, which has been shown to increase first-pass success rates, reduce the time to successful cannulation, and reduce the risk of complications compared with landmark-based techniques.

POSTPROCEDURE

21) We recommend that post-procedure pneumothorax should be ruled out by the detection of bilateral lung sliding using a high-frequency linear transducer before and after insertion of internal jugular and subclavian vein CVCs. 22)We recommend that providers should use ultrasound with rapid infusion of agitated saline to visualize a right atrial swirl sign (RASS) for detecting catheter tip misplacement during CVC insertion. The use of RASS to detect the catheter tip may be considered an advanced skill that requires specific training and expertise.

TRAINING

23) To reduce the risk of mechanical and infectious complications, we recommend that novice providers should complete a systematic training program that includes a combination of simulation-based practice, supervised insertion on patients, and evaluation by an expert operator before attempting ultrasound-guided CVC insertion independently on patients. 24)We recommend that cognitive training in ultrasound-guided CVC insertion should include basic anatomy, ultrasound physics, ultrasound machine knobology, fundamentals of image acquisition and interpretation, detection and management of procedural complications, infection prevention strategies, and pathways to attain competency. 25)We recommend that trainees should demonstrate minimal competence before placing ultrasound-guided CVCs independently. A minimum number of CVC insertions may inform this determination, but a proctored assessment of competence is most important. 26)We recommend that didactic and hands-on training for trainees should coincide with anticipated times of increased performance of vascular access procedures. Refresher training sessions should be offered periodically. 27)We recommend that competency assessments should include formal evaluation of knowledge and technical skills using standardized assessment tools. 28)We recommend that competency assessments should evaluate for proficiency in the following knowledge and skills of CVC insertion: (a) Knowledge of the target vein anatomy, proper vessel identification, and recognition of anatomical variants; (b) Demonstration of CVC insertion with no technical errors based on a procedural checklist; (c) Recognition and management of acute complications, including emergency management of life-threatening complications; (d) Real-time needle tip tracking with ultrasound and cannulation on the first attempt in at least five consecutive simulation. 29)We recommend a periodic proficiency assessment of all operators should be conducted to ensure maintenance of competency.

Ultrasound guidance for central venous catheterisation. A Colombian national survey

Quality problem or issue

Ultrasound (US) is a widely propagated medical technology. Anaesthesiologists increase procedural safety by using US techniques, but training and availability are essential for its usage. Although its utility for central venous catheterisation (CVC) is well established, only a paucity of evidence is available regarding its use in low- and middle-income countries. This study is a nationwide survey of Colombian anaesthesiologists designed to explore the current use of US guidance for CVC.

Initial assessment and implementation

Web-based survey at National level. Anaesthesiologists registered in the Colombian Society of Anaesthesiology and Resuscitation database.

Choice of solution

Demographic variables (age and gender), anaesthesia expertise, years of anaesthesiology practice, US availability, use of US during CVC, reasons for not using US and training experience were collected.

Evaluation

Of 351 respondents (12.3% response rate), 45% reported using US sometimes and always for CVC (95% CI 39%-50%) (n = 157). Most anaesthesiologists obtained training in US through external courses (50.4%) or from colleagues (22.8%). Of the total respondents, 62.7% (n = 220) have US equipment available at all time and this factor was independently associated with the use of US for CVC (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 38.6, P < 0.001).

Lessons learned

US guidance is not a common technique used for CVC by Colombian anaesthesiologists; an important barrier for its use is lack of equipment.

Transitioning from anatomic landmarks to ultrasound guided central venous catheterizations: guidelines applied to clinical practice

Introduction

Centrally inserted central catheter (CICC) insertion is a commonly performed procedure that may give rise to different complications. Despite the suggestion of guidelines to use ultrasound guidance (USG) for vascular access, not all centers use it systematically. The aim of this study is to illustrate the experience with ultrasound in CICC placement at a high-volume oncological center, in a country where the landmark technique is standard.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of a prospective database was performed on CICC placement under USG in the Central Venous Catheter Unit of Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil, from 2012 to 2015.

Results

Three thousand five hundred and seventy-two procedures were recorded. From 2728 CICC placements, 1187 (43.5%) were done using USG. The majority of CICC placements were successful without immediate complications (96.1%). In 55 cases (4.6%), more than three attempts were necessary to puncture the vein. Pneumothorax occurred in 5 cases (0.4%) and arterial puncture was registered in 41 cases (3.5%). An increasing use of USG for placing CICCs was planned and observed over the years and, in the last year of the study, 67.3% of the CICC placements were with USG.

Conclusions

CICC placement with USG is a safe and effective technique. Despite some resistance that is observed, these results support that it is worth following the guidelines that advocate the use of the USG in the placement of CICC.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Central Venous Catheter Confirmation by Bedside Ultrasound Versus Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the accuracy of bedside ultrasound for confirmation of central venous catheter position and exclusion of pneumothorax compared with chest radiography.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists, conference proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles and abstracts describing the diagnostic accuracy of bedside ultrasound compared with chest radiography for confirmation of central venous catheters in sufficient detail to reconstruct 2 × 2 contingency tables were reviewed. Primary outcomes included the accuracy of confirming catheter positioning and detecting a pneumothorax. Secondary outcomes included feasibility, interrater reliability, and efficiency to complete bedside ultrasound confirmation of central venous catheter position.

DATA EXTRACTION

Investigators abstracted study details including research design and sonographic imaging technique to detect catheter malposition and procedure-related pneumothorax. Diagnostic accuracy measures included pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Fifteen studies with 1,553 central venous catheter placements were identified with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of catheter malposition by ultrasound of 0.82 (0.77-0.86) and 0.98 (0.97-0.99), respectively. The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios of catheter malposition by ultrasound were 31.12 (14.72-65.78) and 0.25 (0.13-0.47). The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for pneumothorax detection was nearly 100% in the participating studies. Bedside ultrasound reduced mean central venous catheter confirmation time by 58.3 minutes. Risk of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the studies were high.

CONCLUSIONS

Bedside ultrasound is faster than radiography at identifying pneumothorax after central venous catheter insertion. When a central venous catheter malposition exists, bedside ultrasound will identify four out of every five earlier than chest radiography.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Central Venous Catheter Confirmation by Bedside Ultrasound Versus Chest Radiography in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the accuracy of bedside ultrasound for confirmation of central venous catheter position and exclusion of pneumothorax compared with chest radiography.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists, conference proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles and abstracts describing the diagnostic accuracy of bedside ultrasound compared with chest radiography for confirmation of central venous catheters in sufficient detail to reconstruct 2 × 2 contingency tables were reviewed. Primary outcomes included the accuracy of confirming catheter positioning and detecting a pneumothorax. Secondary outcomes included feasibility, interrater reliability, and efficiency to complete bedside ultrasound confirmation of central venous catheter position.

DATA EXTRACTION

Investigators abstracted study details including research design and sonographic imaging technique to detect catheter malposition and procedure-related pneumothorax. Diagnostic accuracy measures included pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Fifteen studies with 1,553 central venous catheter placements were identified with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of catheter malposition by ultrasound of 0.82 (0.77-0.86) and 0.98 (0.97-0.99), respectively. The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios of catheter malposition by ultrasound were 31.12 (14.72-65.78) and 0.25 (0.13-0.47). The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for pneumothorax detection was nearly 100% in the participating studies. Bedside ultrasound reduced mean central venous catheter confirmation time by 58.3 minutes. Risk of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the studies were high.

CONCLUSIONS

Bedside ultrasound is faster than radiography at identifying pneumothorax after central venous catheter insertion. When a central venous catheter malposition exists, bedside ultrasound will identify four out of every five earlier than chest radiography.