This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) CME: Take the course for this article: Course on Advantages and Disadvantages of Manometry for Verifying Needle Placement during Internal Jugular Cannulation All Versions of this Article: ane.0b013e31818f87e9v1 109/1/130    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (2) Google Scholar Articles by Ezaru, C. S. Articles by Bjerke, R. J. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ezaru, C. S. Articles by Bjerke, R. J. Related Collections Cardiovascular Complications Monitoring (Non-cardiac) Patient Safety

---

PATIENT SAFETY

Eliminating Arterial Injury During Central Venous Catheterization Using Manometry

From the Department of Anesthesiology, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Catalin S. Ezaru, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, 3A101, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University Dr. C, Pittsburgh, PA 15240. Address e-mail to ezaruc{at}anes.upmc.edu.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Unintended arterial puncture occurs in 2%-4.5% of central venous catheterizations, resulting in arterial injury in 0.1%-0.5% of patients. Routine performance of manometry during catheterization may successfully identify unintended arterial puncture and avoid arterial cannulation and injury.

METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all cases of central venous catheter placement during a 15-yr period after implementation of a safety program requiring mandatory use of manometry to verify venous access. Arterial injuries were defined as unintended arterial cannulations with a 7-French or larger catheter or dilator. Arterial punctures were defined as the unintended placement of an 18-gauge catheter or needle into the artery. Data were reviewed for all arterial injuries during the entire 15-yr period. In addition, data on both arterial puncture and subsequent arterial injury were evaluated during the final year of analysis.

RESULTS: A total of 9348 central venous catheters were placed during the observation period. During the full 15 yr of observation, there were no cases of arterial injury. During the final year of assessment, 511 central venous catheters were placed, with arterial punctures in 28 patients (5%). Arterial puncture was recognized without manometry in 24 cases. Arterial puncture was identified only with manometry in 4 cases, with no incidents of arterial injury.

CONCLUSIONS: Consistent use of manometry, to verify venous placement, during central venous catheterization effectively eliminated arterial injury from unintended arterial cannulation during the 15-yr assessment.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. B. Leibowitz and M. A. Rozner PRO: Manometry Should Routinely Be Used During Central Venous Catheterization Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2009; 109(1): 3 - 5. [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. J. Leone CON: Manometry During Internal Jugular Cannulation: Case Not Proven Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2009; 109(1): 6 - 7. [Full Text] [PDF]