Distal superficial femoral vein versus axillary vein central catheter placement under ultrasound guidance for neonates with difficult access: A randomized clinical trial

Abstract

Background: Epicutaneo-caval catheters (ECCs) are extensively used in premature and ill neonates. This prospective, randomized, observational study aimed to compare the outcomes of ECC placement in the distal superficial femoral and axillary veins in neonates with difficult ECC access. Methods: In a neonatal intensive care unit at a tertiary referral center, 60 neonates with difficult ECC access were randomized into two groups with catheters placed using the ultrasound-guided modified dynamic needle tip positioning (MDNTP) technique: distal superficial femoral vein (DSFV) and axillary vein (AV) groups. Results: The first attempt success rate was significantly higher in the DSFV group than in the AV group [23/30 (76.7%) vs 11/30 (36.7%), p = 0.001; odds ratio (OR), 0.176; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.057–0.543]. The mean procedural duration was significantly shorter in the DSFV group than in the AV group [mean: 308.5 (standard deviation: 81.1) s vs 522.74 (134.8) s, t = −7.17, p < 0.001]. The incidence of complications was significantly lower in the DSFV group than in the AV group [4/30 (13.3%) vs 12/30 (40.0%), p = 0.019; OR, 4.333; 95% CI 1.203–15.604]. The number of attempts was significantly fewer in the DSFV group than in the AV group ( p = 0.012). Conclusions: The distal superficial femoral and axillary veins are two alternative and safe access points for ECC placement in premature neonates (weight < 2.5 kg) with difficult access. However, access through the distal superficial femoral vein was quicker, easier, and had fewer complications than through the axillary vein.

The use of distal femoral venous access for pulmonary vein cryoballoon ablation and left atrial appendage occluder implantation: randomized study design and preliminary results

“…Успешная пункции с первой попытки встречалась значимо чаще в группе дистальной пункции (77% против 37%, p = 0,001). Также дистальная пункция имела преимущества по времени процедуры (309 против 523 секунд, p<0,001) и перипроцедурным осложнениям (4 против 12, p = 0,019) [17].…”