| Literature DB >> 35174113 |
Vito D'Andrea1, Giorgia Prontera1, Serena Antonia Rubortone1, Lucilla Pezza1, Giovanni Pinna1, Giovanni Barone2, Mauro Pittiruti3, Giovanni Vento1.
Abstract
The umbilical venous catheter (UVC) is one of the most commonly used central lines in neonates. It can be easily inserted soon after birth providing stable intravenous access in infants requiring advanced resuscitation in the delivery room or needing medications, fluids, and parenteral nutrition during the 1st days of life. Resident training is crucial for UVC placement. The use of simulators allows trainees to gain practical experience and confidence in performing the procedure without risks for patients. UVCs are easy to insert, however when the procedure is performed without the use of ultrasound, there is a quite high risk, up to 40%, of non-central position. Ultrasound-guided UVC tip location is a simple and learnable technique and therefore should be widespread among all physicians. The feasibility of targeted training on the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) for UVC placement in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) among neonatal medical staff has been demonstrated. Conversely, UVC-related complications are very common and can sometimes be life-threatening. Despite UVCs being used by neonatologists for over 60 years, there are still no standard guidelines for assessment or monitoring of tip location, securement, management, or dwell time. This review article is an overview of the current knowledge and evidence available in the literature about UVCs. Our aim is to provide precise and updated recommendations on the use of this central line.Entities:
Keywords: CRBSI (catheter-related bloodstream infection); POCUS; catheters and catheterization; catheters and catheterization complications; technology; training; umbilical venous catheters
Year: 2022 PMID: 35174113 PMCID: PMC8841780 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.774705
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Different methods to estimate a correct UVC insertion length.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Dunn ( | 50 UV (at necropsy) | Shoulder-umbilicus distance |
| Shukla and Ferrara ( | 39 UV and 4 UA, BW 2,037 ± 1,077 g | Lenght (cm) = [(3 * BW in Kg + 9) / 2 +1] |
| Verheij et al. ( | 143 UV using the Shukla formula | Lenght (cm) = [(3 * BW in Kg + 9) / 2] |
| Vali et al. ( | 82 UV and 55 UA | Umbilicus-mid-xiphoid-bed distance |
| Gupta et al. ( | 170 UV, BW 490 ± 4,800 g, EG 24–41 weeks | Lenght (cm) = Umbilical-Nipple length – 1 cm |
The Shukla formula had the highest rate of either correct or high position. The Dunn formula performed quite poorly.
Figure 1Correct umbilical venous catheter position.
Figure 2Comparison of radiographic and ultrasound images of a correctly positioned UVC.
Correct steps in UVC management.
| 1 | Choice of selected patients with precise indications |
| 2 | Use of silver-impregnated catheters if plan to keep the device |
| 3 | Line bundles and dedicated line care teams (recommended to prevent CRBSI) |
| 4 | Use of point of care ultrasound to visualize catheter tip location during insertion and detect late catheter migration (to prevent mechanical complications) |
| 5 | Early removal of UVC (within 4 days) |