Comparison of Landmark v/s USG Guided Technique for Internal Jugular Vein Cannulation in Adult Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery

Man Bhavan Mahajan; Indu Verma; Rupali Mahajan; Karthik Kateel

doi:10.18502/aacc.v9i5.13961

Comparison of Landmark v/s USG Guided Technique for Internal Jugular Vein Cannulation in Adult Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery

Abstract

Background: Obtaining central venous access is the basic requirement in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Use of ultrasound (USG) for accessing IJV cannulation, improves the success rate and reduces the number of complications that may arise due to blind approach. Through this study we aimed to compare landmark vs real time USG guided IJV cannulation techniques.
Methods: 190 adult patient’s undergoing cardiac surgery were randomly divided into two groups of 95 each. Patients in Group A (Landmark based approach) were being compared to Group B (USG based) in terms of – success rate, first attempt success rate, total cannulation time, number of attempts, complications and success rate among residents and consultants.
Results: Success rate obtained in Group A was 89.4% compared to 100% in group B (P = 0.001). First attempt success rate was 67.36% in group A and 91.57% in group B (P < 0.001). Group B showed less number of attempts. Total cannulation time in group A (252.2 ± 66.4) sec was significantly higher (P<0.001) than group B (182.5 ± 40.39) sec. Rate of complications such as hematoma formation and carotid artery puncture were also significantly higher in group A.
Conclusion: The real time USG guided IJV cannulation is better technique than Landmark guided approach as it has significantly higher success rate, reduces the number of attempts, reduces the total time for cannulation and decreases the rate of complications. Also, success rate even increases among junior residents with the use of USG.

[1] Hind D, Calvert N, McWilliams R, Thomas SM, Beverley C, Davidson A. Ultrasonic locating devices for central venous cannulation: meta-analysis. BMJ.2003, 327:361.
[2] Khalil KG, Parker FB Jr., Mukherjee N, Webb WR. Thoracic duct injury. A complication of jugular vein catheterization. JAMA 1972; 221:908-9.
[3] Ishizuka M, Nagata H, Takagi K, Kubota K. Right internal jugular vein is recommended for central venous catheterization. J Invest Surg. 2010; 23:110-4.
[4] Sulek CA, Blas ML, Lobato EB. A Randomized study of left versus right internal jugular vein cannulation in adults. J Clin Anesth. 2000; 12:142-5.
[5] National Institute for Clinical Excellence. NICE Technical Appraisal Guidance No. 49: Guidance on the Use of Ultrasound Locating Devices for Placing Central Venous Catheters. London: NICE; September, 2002.
[6] Sazdov D, Srceva MJ, Todorova ZN. Comparative Analysis of Ultrasound Guided Central Venous Catheterization Compared to Blind Catheterization. Pril (Makedon Akad Nauk Umet Odd Med Nauki). 2017; 38(2):107-114.
[7] Maecken T, Grau T. Ultrasound imaging in vascular access. Crit Care Med. 2007; 35:S178-85.
[8] Kunhahamed MO, Abraham SV, Palatty BU, Krishnan SV, Rajeev PC, Gopinathan V. A comparison of internal jugular vein cannulation by ultrasound- guided and anatomical landmark technique in resource-limited emergency department setting. J Med Ultrasound. 2019; 27(4):187-91.
[9] Karakitsos D, Labropoulos N, De Groot E, Patrianakos AP, Kouraklis G, Poularas J, et al. Real‑time ultrasound‑guided catheterisation of the internal jugular vein: A prospective comparison with the landmark technique in critical care patients. Crit Care. 2006; 10:R162.
[10] Shrestha BR, Gautam B. Ultrasound versus landmark technique: a prospective randomized comparative study of internal jugular vein cannulation in an intensive care unit. JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc. 2011; 51(182):56-61.
[11] Karimi-Sari H, Faraji M, Mohazzab Torabi S, Asjodi G. Success rate and complications of internal jugular vein catheterization with and without ultrasonography guide. Nurs Midwifery Stud. 2014:3(4):e23204.
[12] Slama M, Novara A, Safavian A, Ossart M, Safar M, Fagon JY. Improvement of internal jugular vein cannulation using an ultrasound-guided technique. Intensive Care Med.1997; 23(8):916-9.
[13] Turker G, Kaya FN, Gurbet A, Aksu H, Erdogan C, Atlas A. Internal jugular vein cannulation: An ultrasound‑guided technique versus a landmark‑guided technique. Clinics. 2009; 64:989‑92.
[14] Tempe DK, Hasija S, Malik I, Singh A, Hansda U, Joshi CS, et al. Use of transthoracic echocardiography probe for locating the internal jugular vein to assist cannulation in children and its comparison with the standard landmark technique. MAMC J Med Sci. 2015; 1:20‑4.
[15] Denys BG, Uretsky BF, Reddy PS. Ultrasound‑assisted cannulation of the internal jugular vein. A prospective comparison to the external landmark‑guided technique. Circulation. 1993; 87:1557‑62.
[16] Leung J, Duffy M, Finckh A. Real-time ultrasonographically-guided internal jugular vein catheterization in emergency department increases success rate and reduces complications: A randomized, prospective study. Ann Emerg Med. 2006;48(5):540-7.
[17] Palepu GB, Deven J, Subrahmanyam M, Mohan S. Impact of ultrasonography on central venous catheter insertion in intensive care. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2009; 19(3):191-8.
[18] Vucevic M, Tehan B, Gamlin F, Berridge JC, Boylan M. The SMART needle. A new Doppler ultrasound‑guided vascular access needle. Anaesthesia. 1994; 49:889‑91
[19] Choraria S, Choudhary N, C. Sachdeva H, Guria S. Comparison of catheterization of internal jugular vein by ultrasound guided versus landmark approach in I.C.U. patients. Ind J Clin Anaesth. 2020; 5(3):440-4.
[20] Ray BR, Mohan VK, Kashyap L, Shende D, Darlong VM, Pandey RK. Internal jugular vein cannulation: A comparison of three techniques. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013; 29(3):367-71.
[21] Bhandari G, Mitra S, Saxena R, Shahi KS, Chand (col) Gyan. Comparison between ultrasound guided techniques and conventional anatomical landmark technique for internal jugular vein cannulation: A clinical prospective study. Ann int med dent res. 2017;3(4).
[22] Hayashi H, Amano M. Does ultrasound imaging before puncture facilitate internal jugular vein cannulation? Prospective randomized comparison with landmark- guided puncture in ventilated patients. J Cardiothorac vasc Anesth. 2002; 16(5):572-5.
[23] Shaaib H, Al-Otaibi A, Al-Otaibi AK, Ali A, Alshamrani MA, Mahzri IO, et al. A Systematic Review of Complications during Insertion of Central Venous Catheterization Guided by Ultrasound versus Anatomical Landmark. Health Sciences. 2020; 9(12):124-31.
[24] Gordon AC, Saliken JC, Johns D, Owen R, Gray RR. US guided puncture of internal jugular vein: complications and anatomical considerations. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1998, 9:333-338.
[25] Bose N, Patel H, Kamat H. Evaluation of ultrasound for central venous access in ICU by an in experienced trainee. Indian J Crit Care Med.2014; 18(1):26-32.
[26] Dodge KL, Lynch CA, Moore CL, Biroscak BJ, Evans LV. Use of ultrasound guidance improves central venous catheter insertion success rates among junior residents. J Ultrasound Md. 2012; 31(10):1519-26.

Files	XML pdf (537KB)
Issue	Vol 9 No Supp. 1 (2023): Supplement 1
Section	Research Article(s)
DOI	https://doi.org/10.18502/aacc.v9i5.13961
Keywords
Central venous catheterization Anatomical landmarks Real time USG

Rights and permissions
	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Mahajan M, Verma I, Mahajan R, Kateel K. Comparison of Landmark v/s USG Guided Technique for Internal Jugular Vein Cannulation in Adult Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery. Arch Anesth & Crit Care. 2023;9(Supp. 1):418-423.

Vancouver

Download Citation