490 likes | 1.77k Views
Goals. Understand the necessity for US Guided Central AccessUnderstand the difference between Static, Dynamic, Assisted and Guided US accessBe able to perform Dynamic US Guided IJ or Femoral Line. Introduction. This presentation is only one part of an integrated process to teach you and insure com
E N D
1. Ultrasound GuidedVascular Access Gary Dufresne, DO
Emergency Medicine Physician
SAUSHEC
2. Goals Understand the necessity for US Guided Central Access
Understand the difference between Static, Dynamic, Assisted and Guided US access
Be able to perform Dynamic US Guided IJ or Femoral Line
3. Introduction This presentation is only one part of an integrated process to teach you and insure competence in US guided vascular access.
The resident learner will achieve competency by:
Attending US Introduction Course during Intern Orientation
Complete Vascular Access Learning Module
Participate in Animal Labs with integration of US Guided Central Venous access
Completing the SAUSHEC Emergency Ultrasound Rotation
Applying US Guided Vascular Access skills in real life clinical applications throughout residency
4. NumbersOverall Complication Rates*
5. Standard of care? 2001 Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence Report
“Top 11 Highly Proven” pt safety practices
“All central cannula placements be guided by real-time, dynamic US.”
Discussion:
What do you think?
6. Research Ultrasonic locating devices for central access
2003, BMJ, Meta-analysis of randomized trials
18 trials, n- 1646
Clear improvement in success rates in using US for IJ cannulation in adults and peds compared to LM
Not so much for subclavian or femoral
7. Research SOAP3- Sonography Outcomes Assessment Program, US assisted central access (IJ)
2005, Crit Care Med, Prospective Randomized
Dynamic (D) vs. Static (S) vs. Landmark (LM)
n- 201
Primary Outcome (Success Rate)
D- 98% S- 82% LM- 64%
Complication Rate
D- 3% S- 3% LM- 13%*
*Limitation- lead author performed HALF of sticks
8. Research Single-operator (D1) vs. two-operator (D2) US
for IJ
2006, Acad Emerg Med, Prospective Randomized
n- 44 pts
D1 96%
D2 95%
D1 and D2 techniques are equivalent
*Limitation- Only 3 operators and 2 were study investigators
9. Guided vs. Assisted Landmark- “Old School”
Static US- US look plus 2 skin markers
US Assisted- static technique plus “improper” dynamic technique
US Guided- dynamic real-time visualization of needle entering the vein!!!
10. Probe Selection Linear
7.5Mhz, Vascular, Soft Tissue, Ocular
Phased Array
5-1Mhz, Echo, Abd, OB, ?Vascular Access
Pros and Cons
11. Technique Transverse
Longitudinal
Common
Position equipment
Prep sterile supplies
and patient
Get Sterile
Sterile probe cover
12. Technique
13. Technique Transverse
ID and Center Anatomy
Pythagorean Theorem
ID depth to center of vessel
Back off the transducer equal distance
Enter at 45 degree angle
14. Technique Transverse (Cont)
Watch for tissue invagination
Look for “ring-down” artifact
You have to be aware of both US images and Needle/Syringe at the same time
15. Technique Longitudinal
ID, confirm, and maintain largest diameter image
Needle centered on probe
Visualize entire needle
Move needle to vessel- NEVER probe to find needle
16. Novel Applications Peripheral IVs
EJs are fun but not for the patient
Arterial Lines (Radial, brachial, etc…)
Why do a procedure blind?
Potentially reduce complications
Principles and technique are essentially the same as central access but the target is smaller
17. Peripheral Anatomy
18. Summary US Guided- NOT Assisted
Pythagoras? TRV Approach- back up equal to depth and use 45° angle
Try the Phased Array Probe and Longitudinal Technique
IJ Complication Rate with US is sig. reduced 13%? 3% **
Use US correctly but have other vascular access tools.
19. References