Central Venous Catheterization: Comparison between Interventional Radiological Procedure and Blind Surgical Procedure.
10.3348/jkrs.2002.47.5.467
- Author:
Won Gyu SONG
1
;
Gong Yong JIN
;
Young Min HAN
;
He Chul YU
Author Information
1. Department of Radiology, Chonbuk National University Medical School, Korea. ymhan@chonbuk.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Catheters and catheterization;
Catheters and catheterization, central venous access
- MeSH:
Catheter Obstruction;
Catheterization, Central Venous*;
Catheters;
Central Venous Catheters*;
Female;
Hematoma;
Humans;
Male;
Pneumothorax;
Prospective Studies;
Punctures;
Radiology, Interventional;
Subclavian Vein;
Venous Thrombosis
- From:Journal of the Korean Radiological Society
2002;47(5):467-472
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To determine the usefulness and safety of radiological placement of a central venous catheter by prospectively comparing the results of interventional radiology and blind surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For placement of a central venous catheter, the blind surgical method was used in 78 cases (77 patients), and the interventional radiological method in 56 cases (54 patients). The male to female ratio was 66:68, and the patients' mean age was 48 (range, 18-80) years. A tunneled central venous catheter was used in 74 cases, and a chemoport in 60. We evaluated the success and duration of the procedures, the number of punctures required, and ensuing complications, comparing the results of the two methods. RESULTS: The success rates of the interventional radiological and the blind surgical procedure were 100% and 94.8%, respectively. The duration of central catheterization was 3-395 (mean, 120) days, that of chemoport was 160.9 days, and that of tunneled central venous catheter was 95.1 days. The mean number of punctures of the subclavian vein was 1.2 for interventional radiology, and 2.1 for blind surgery. The mean duration of the interventional radiological and the blind surgical procedure was, respectively, 30 and 40 minutes. The postprocedural complication rate was 27.6% (37 cases). Early complications occurred in nine cases (6.7%): where interventional radiology was used, there was one case of hematoma, and blind surgery gave rise to hematoma (n=2), pneumothorax (n=2), and early deviation of the catheter (n=4). Late complications occurred in 32 cases (23.9%). Interventional radiology involved infection (n=4), venous thrombosis (n=1), catheter displacement (n=2) and catheter obstruction (n=5), while the blind surgical procedure gave rise to infection (n=5), venous thrombosis (n=3), catheter displacement (n=4) and catheter obstruction (n=8). CONCLUSION: The success rate of interventional radiological placement of a central venous catheter was high and the complication rate was low. In comparison with the blind surgical procedure, it is a very safe and useful method.
