Literature DB >> 31232853

Superiority of Dynamic Needle Tip Positioning for Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Venous Catheterization in Patients Younger Than 2 Years Old: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Jun Takeshita1,2, Takayuki Yoshida2, Yasufumi Nakajima2, Yoshinobu Nakayama3, Kei Nishiyama4, Yukie Ito1, Yoshiyuki Shimizu1, Muneyuki Takeuchi1, Nobuaki Shime5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated whether the dynamic needle tip positioning technique increased the success rate of ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheterization in pediatric patients with a small-diameter vein compared with the static ultrasound-guided technique.
DESIGN: Randomized controlled study.
SETTING: Single institution, Osaka Women's and Children's Hospital. PATIENTS: The study population included 60 pediatric patients less than 2 years old who required peripheral venous catheterization in the PICU.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly divided into the dynamic needle tip positioning (n = 30) or static group (n = 30). Each group received ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheterization with or without dynamic needle tip positioning, respectively. The Fisher exact test, Kaplan-Meier curve plots, log-rank tests, and Mann-Whitney U test were used in the statistical analysis.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The first-attempt success rate was higher in the dynamic needle tip positioning group than in the static group (86.7% vs 60%; p = 0.039; relative risk = 1.44; 95% CI, 1.05-2.0). The overall success rate within 10 minutes was higher in the dynamic needle tip positioning group than in the static group (90% vs 63.3%; p = 0.03; relative risk = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.06-1.91). Significantly fewer attempts were made in the dynamic needle tip positioning group than in the static group (median [interquartile range, range] = 1 [1-1, 1-2] vs 1 [1-2, 1-3]; p = 0.013]). The median (interquartile range) catheterization times were 51.5 seconds (43-63 s) and 71.5 seconds (45-600 s) in the dynamic needle tip positioning and static groups, respectively (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic needle tip positioning increased the first-attempt and overall success rates of ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheterization in pediatric patients less than 2 years old.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31232853     DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000002034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med        ISSN: 1529-7535            Impact factor:   3.624


  5 in total

1.  A 3D multi-modal intelligent intervention system using electromagnetic navigation for real-time positioning and ultrasound images: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Weiwei Tang; Yun Zhou; Hui Zhao; Guangshun Sun; Dawei Rong; Zhitao Li; Meng Hu; Liu Han; Xu He; Suming Zhao; Xiaoyang Chen; Zhongming Li; Hongxin Yuan; Songwang Chen; Qian Wang; Zhouxiao Li; Jianping Gu; Xuehao Wang; Jinhua Song
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-06

2.  Establishing a risk assessment framework for point-of-care ultrasound.

Authors:  Thomas W Conlon; Nadya Yousef; Juan Mayordomo-Colunga; Cecile Tissot; Maria V Fraga; Shazia Bhombal; Pradeep Suryawanshi; Alberto Medina Villanueva; Bijan Siassi; Yogen Singh
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 3.183

3.  Retrospective Study of the Application Value Analysis of Ultrasound-Guided Technology in Peripheral Deep Venous Catheterization of Neonates.

Authors:  Tingting Yin; Yuan Huo; Yang Zhao; Weiyang Li; Hongxia Gao
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2022-07-23       Impact factor: 3.464

4.  Application of the dynamic needle tip positioning method for ultrasound-guided arterial catheterization in elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Jae-Geum Shim; Eun A Cho; Tae-Ryun Gahng; Jiyeon Park; Eun Kyung Lee; Eun Jung Oh; Jin Hee Ahn
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 3.752

Review 5.  Ultrasound-guided peripheral vascular catheterization in pediatric patients: a narrative review.

Authors:  Yoshinobu Nakayama; Jun Takeshita; Yasufumi Nakajima; Nobuaki Shime
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 9.097

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.