“The objective of this study was to (1) describe the technical aspects of fluoroscopy-guided umbilical venous catheter placement (FGUVCP); and (2) determine the procedural success rate, factors contributing to procedural failure, and risks of the procedure.” DeWitt et al (2014).
DeWitt, A.G., Zampi, J.D., Donohue, J.E., Yu, S. and Lloyd, T.R. (2014) Fluoroscopy-guided Umbilical Venous Catheter Placement in Infants with Congenital Heart Disease. Congenital Heart Disease. November 17th. [epub ahead of print].
Fluoroscopy-guided umbilical venous catheter placement http://ctt.ec/7dR54+ @ivteam #ivteam
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to (1) describe the technical aspects of fluoroscopy-guided umbilical venous catheter placement (FGUVCP); and (2) determine the procedural success rate, factors contributing to procedural failure, and risks of the procedure.
BACKGROUND: Umbilical venous catheters are advantageous compared with femoral venous access, but can be difficult to place at the bedside.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review from a single tertiary care referral institution.
RESULTS: FGUVCP was successful in 138 of 180 patients (76.7%) over a seven-year period. Patients in whom FGUVCP was successful were younger at the time of procedure compared with patients in whom FGUVCP was unsuccessful (median 18.2 vs. 22.2 hours, P = .03). The optimal age cutoff to predict FGUVCP success was 20 hours with a high positive predictive value (82.4%) but low negative predictive value (32.5%). No other variables were associated with procedural failure, though functional univentricular heart and older gestational age trended toward statistical significance. Median radiation time, contrast exposure, and blood loss were 3.2 minutes, 1 mL, and 1 mL, respectively. A total of 10 complications in 10 patients were associated with FGUVCP.
CONCLUSIONS: FGUVCP is a safe and highly successful way to obtain central venous access in neonates with congenital heart disease. Older age at the time of procedure is associated with procedural failure, but utilization of an age cutoff may not be clinically useful.
Thank you to our partners for supporting IVTEAM
Now that you have read this item on IVTEAM why don't you help other visitors and choose a star rating for what you have read.
Provide your star rating below.