Search Results (3)

Background: Central venous catheters (CVCs) are indispensable tools in intensive care and emergency medicine. CVC malpositions still occur frequently and can cause various complications leading to increased patient mortality. A microbubbles test (MBT) can be used to confirm correct CVC positioning. However, there is serious doubt regarding whether the currently applied threshold of a 2 s push-to-bubbles time (PTB time) for rapid atrial swirl sign (RASS) in an MBT is reliable and accurate. The aim of the present study was to prove the quality of a new threshold: 1 s. Methods: Consecutive patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in a German neurological specialist hospital from 1 March 2021 to 20 July 2022 were enrolled. After ultrasound-guided CVC insertion, an MBT was performed, PTB time was measured, and RASS was interpreted. Additionally, a chest X-ray (CXR) was requested to check CVC position. Results: A total of 102 CVCs (98% jugular and 2% subclavian) were inserted in 102 patients (38% female and 62% male; median age: 66 years). Negative RASS (PTB time > 1 s) was observed in 2 out of 102 patients, resulting in an echocardiographic malposition rate of 2.0%. CXR confirmed the echocardiographic results. After correcting CVC position in the initially malpositioned CVCs, the PTB time was <1 s (positive RASS). The MBT protocol took about 0.5 min on average, while the CXR results were all available within 30 min. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value were each 100% for the detection of CVC malpositions via an MBT using a threshold of 1 s compared to CXR. Conclusions: A new threshold of a 1 s PTB time for RASS in an MBT could detect CVC malpositions with excellent quality compared to CXR. Since the MBT was fast and safe and could be performed at the bedside, we propose that an MBT with the new and reliable threshold of 1 s should be routinely used in patient care. Full article

Background: We have previously reported that the ultrasound (US)-guided tip positioning is an accurate and safe procedure for placement of retrograde- and antegrade-tunneled hemodialysis catheters (HDCs). However, determinants of tunneled hemodialysis catheter implantation time by using US guidance have not been described yet. Therefore, we here report a comparative analysis to identify determinants of implantation time for retrograde- and antegrade-tunneled HDCs placement by US guidance. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study to compare implantation time for US-guided tip positioning of retrograde- and antegrade-tunneled HDCs. We included a total number of 47 tunneled HDC insertions, including 23 retrograde tunneled and 24 antegrade-tunneled HDCs in patients requiring placement of an HDC for the temporary or permanent treatment of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in a single-center, cross-sectional pilot study. Results: We show that clinical and laboratory parameters did not differ between retrograde- and antegrade-tunneled HDC implantations. There was a tendency for shorter implantation time in antegrade-tunneled HDCs, although not statistically significant. Finally, we identified an independent inverse association between body weight (BW) and platelet counts with HDC implantation time specifically in antegrade-tunneled HDCs. Conclusion: In this study, we identified determinants for tunneled HDC implantation time that might be relevant for patients and interventionists. Full article

Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a common medical problem in patients worldwide, with an increasing prevalence of patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). In patients requiring RRT for more than two weeks or those who develop ESKD, tunneled hemodialysis catheter (HDC) insertion is preferred, based on a lower risk for infectious complications. While the efficacy of ultrasound (US)-guided tip positioning in antegrade-tunneled HDCs has previously been shown, its application for the insertion of retrograde-tunneled HDCs has not been described yet. This is especially important, since the retrograde-tunneled technique has several advantages over the antegrade-tunneled HDC insertion technique. Therefore, we here report our first experience of applying the rapid atrial swirl sign (RASS) for US-guided tip positioning of retrograde-tunneled HDCs. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study to assess the feasibility of applying the RASS for US-guided tip positioning of retrograde-tunneled HDCs. We performed a total number of 24 retrograde-tunneled HDC insertions in 23 patients (requiring placement of a HDC for the temporary or permanent treatment of ESKD) admitted to our Department of Nephrology and Rheumatology at the University Medical Center Göttingen, Germany. Results: The overall success rate of applying the RASS for US-guided tip positioning of retrograde-tunneled HDCs was 24/24 (100%), with proper tip position in the right atrium in 18/23 (78.3%), or cavoatrial junction in 5/23 (21.7%) when RASS was positive and improper position when RASS was negative in 1/1 (100%), confirmed by portable anterior-posterior chest radiography, with only minor post-procedural bleeding in 2/24 (8.3%). In addition, this insertion technique allows optimal HDC flow, without any observed malfunction. Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate the efficacy of the RASS for US-guided tip positioning of retrograde-tunneled HDCs in patients with ESKD. Application of the RASS for US-guided tip positioning is an accurate and safe procedure for the proper placement of retrograde-tunneled HDCs. Full article