<?xml version='1.0'?>
<!DOCTYPE art SYSTEM 'http://www.biomedcentral.com/xml/article.dtd'>
<art>
   <ui>cc6301</ui>
   <ji>CCJ</ji>
   <fm>
      <dochead>Poster presentation</dochead>
      <bibl>
         <title>
            <p>Use of ultrasound for central venous catheter placement</p>
         </title>
         <aug>
            <au id="A1">
               <snm>Angelini</snm>
               <fnm>T</fnm>
               <insr iid="I1"/>
            </au>
            <au id="A2">
               <snm>Bevilacqua</snm>
               <fnm>L</fnm>
               <insr iid="I1"/>
            </au>
            <au id="A3">
               <snm>Forfori</snm>
               <fnm>F</fnm>
               <insr iid="I2"/>
            </au>
            <au id="A4">
               <snm>Licitra</snm>
               <fnm>G</fnm>
               <insr iid="I2"/>
            </au>
            <au id="A5">
               <snm>DeSimone</snm>
               <fnm>L</fnm>
               <insr iid="I2"/>
            </au>
            <au id="A6">
               <snm>Giunta</snm>
               <fnm>F</fnm>
               <insr iid="I2"/>
            </au>
         </aug>
         <insg>
            <ins id="I1">
               <p>Scuola di Specializzazione in Anestesia e Rianimazione, Pisa, Italy.</p>
            </ins>
            <ins id="I2">
               <p>Department of surgery, AOUP, Pisa, Italy.</p>
            </ins>
         </insg>
         <source>Critical Care</source>
         <supplement>
            <title>
               <p>28th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine</p>
            </title>
            <note>Meeting abstracts</note>
         </supplement>
         <conference>
            <title>
               <p>28th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine</p>
            </title>
            <location>Brussels, Belgium</location>
            <date-range>18&#8211;21 March 2008</date-range>
            <url>http://www.intensive.org/</url>
         </conference>
         <issn>1364-8535</issn>
         <pubdate>2008</pubdate>
         <volume>12</volume>
         <issue>Suppl 2</issue>
         <fpage>P80</fpage>
         <url>http://ccforum.com/content/12/S2/P80</url>
         <xrefbib>
            <pubid idtype="doi">10.1186/cc6301</pubid>
         </xrefbib>
      </bibl>
      <history>
         <pub>
            <date>
               <day>13</day>
               <month>3</month>
               <year>2008</year>
            </date>
         </pub>
      </history>
      <cpyrt>
         <year>2008</year>
         <collab>BioMed Central Ltd</collab>
         <note/>
      </cpyrt>
   </fm>
   <bdy>
      <sec>
         <st>
            <p>Introduction</p>
         </st>
         <p>The placement of a central venous catheter is a common practice in the ICU and the incidence of mechanical complications occurs is 5&#8211;19% of patients. In this study we compare the ultrasound approach with classic landmark technique in terms of reduction of mechanical complications and the number of attempts needed for the cannulation of the internal jugular vein.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec>
         <st>
            <p>Methods</p>
         </st>
         <p>We examined 31 patients admitted to the ICU: in 20 of them the cannulation of the internal jugular vein was obtained using real-time ultrasound guidance, while in 11 patients we employed the landmark technique (axial approach). We recorded the number of complications and the number of attempts, correlating with the experience of the operator. All data were statistically examined with Student's <it>t </it>test (number of attempts) and Fisher's test for count of odds ratio (incidence of complications).</p>
      </sec>
      <sec>
         <st>
            <p>Results</p>
         </st>
         <p>We reported 9% of complications in the landmark group (one accidental arterial puncture) and 6% in the ultrasound group (one pneumothorax). The odds ratio for these data is 0.5 (95% CI = 0.006&#8211;45.4). We found a statistically significant difference in the number of attempts performed, with a lower value in the ultrasound group (mean &#177; SD, ultrasound 1.1 &#177; 0.30 vs landmark technique 1.7 &#177; 0.78; <it>P </it>= 0.034). No difference in the number of attempts was evidenced by the experience of the operator using the ultrasound approach. See Figure <figr fid="F1">1</figr>.</p>
         <fig id="F1">
            <title>
               <p>Figure 1</p>
            </title>
            <text>
               <p/>
            </text>
            <graphic file="cc6301-1"/>
         </fig>
      </sec>
      <sec>
         <st>
            <p>Conclusion</p>
         </st>
         <p>Our data confirm that use of ultrasound for central venous catheter placement is safer and is associated with a lower risk of complications than the classical approach, especially for low-experience operators.</p>
      </sec>
   </bdy>
   <bm>
      <refgrp>
         <bibl id="B1">
            <title>
               <p>Preventing complication of central venous catheterization</p>
            </title>
            <aug>
               <au>
                  <snm>McGee</snm>
                  <fnm>D</fnm>
               </au>
               <au>
                  <snm>Gould</snm>
                  <fnm>M</fnm>
               </au>
            </aug>
            <source>N Engl J Med</source>
            <pubdate>2003</pubdate>
            <volume>348</volume>
            <fpage>1123</fpage>
            <lpage>1133</lpage>
            <xrefbib>
               <pubidlist>
                  <pubid idtype="doi">10.1056/NEJMra011883</pubid>
                  <pubid idtype="pmpid" link="fulltext">12646670</pubid>
               </pubidlist>
            </xrefbib>
         </bibl>
         <bibl id="B2">
            <title>
               <p>Ultrasound imaging in vascular access</p>
            </title>
            <aug>
               <au>
                  <snm>Maecken</snm>
                  <fnm>T</fnm>
               </au>
            </aug>
            <source>Crit Care Med</source>
            <pubdate>2007</pubdate>
            <volume>35</volume>
            <fpage>S178</fpage>
            <lpage>S185</lpage>
            <xrefbib>
               <pubidlist>
                  <pubid idtype="doi">10.1097/01.CCM.0000260629.86351.A5</pubid>
                  <pubid idtype="pmpid" link="fulltext">17446777</pubid>
               </pubidlist>
            </xrefbib>
         </bibl>
         <bibl id="B3">
            <title>
               <p>Real-time ultrasound-guided catheterisation of the vein: a prospective comparison with the landmark technique in critical care patients</p>
            </title>
            <aug>
               <au>
                  <snm>Karakitsos</snm>
                  <fnm>D</fnm>
               </au>
               <etal/>
            </aug>
            <source>Crit Care</source>
            <pubdate>2006</pubdate>
            <volume>10</volume>
            <fpage>R162</fpage>
            <xrefbib>
               <pubidlist>
                  <pubid idtype="pmcid">1794469</pubid>
                  <pubid idtype="pmpid" link="fulltext">17112371</pubid>
                  <pubid idtype="doi">10.1186/cc5101</pubid>
               </pubidlist>
            </xrefbib>
         </bibl>
      </refgrp>
   </bm>
</art>
