Ultrasound guided percutaneous cephalic venipuncture for implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices
Background: Preoperative ultrasound (US) for cephalic cut-down is related to shorter procedure time and higher success rate. This study aimed to assess efficiency of US-guided percutaneous cephalic vein (CV) puncture for placement of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Methods: Patients...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The journal of vascular access 2022-05, Vol.23 (3), p.416-421, Article 1129729821995295 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background:
Preoperative ultrasound (US) for cephalic cut-down is related to shorter procedure time and higher success rate. This study aimed to assess efficiency of US-guided percutaneous cephalic vein (CV) puncture for placement of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).
Methods:
Patients undergoing a procedure including both US-guided pectoral nerve block (PECS) and percutaneous CV puncture were retrospectively investigated. Patient medical history and demographic data was collected. Clinical features of the procedures and intra- and post-operative complications occurring were collected from patient records. Clinical data included target vessel features, and the time taken for the following: CV puncture; CV and PECS puncture; total procedure.
Results:
In total 34 patients had CV puncture with US-guided PECS block was attempted in all patients and the procedure was successful in 27 of 34 (79.4%) patients. The total number of CV puncture attempts was 62 for 34 leads (mean attempts per lead = 1.82). The mean ± standard deviation time for CV puncture was 137.5 ± 27.4 s. There were no venous access-related complications.
Conclusion:
US-guided CV puncture appears feasible and safe with an acceptable success rate. In case of failure of the US-guided axillary or subclavian vein approach, it may be preferred as an alternative to the cephalic cut-down procedure, where the success rate is relatively lower and the risk of bleeding is higher. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1129-7298 1724-6032 |
DOI: | 10.1177/1129729821995295 |