The Central Line Part 2: Technique & Procedural Steps

a blog series on emergency medicine procedures

In the last post (the central line part 1) we focused on the indications/contraindications and anatomic considerations. Here we focus on technique and procedural steps. Enjoy. 

 

HUNTING & GATHERING

*note: images shown in this section are institution-specific (Rhode Island Hospital Emergency Department) 

Find a computer with a functioning Topaz to obtain informed consent:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Go to this corner in any critical care room (here is a closer look) and obtain a central line kit:

OR

Finally, obtain these items:

  • mayo stand
  • sterile gloves
  • chlorhexidine scrub
  • 2-3 sterile saline flushes
  • non-sterile marking pen
  • ultrasound machine and ultrasound probe cover
  • in kit: hat, gown, facemask

 

PREP

PRE-STERILITY:

  • Open kit and empty sterile contents onto the field
  • ULTRASOUND:
    • Plug in ultrasound machine. It WILL run out of battery if you don’t and the screen will shut off in the middle of the procedure
    • Test your US probe orientation: tap gently on left side of probe…this should match left side of your screen
    • Examine the target vein: is it compressible? Is it plump and easily visualized?
  • PATIENT:
    • Position the patient
    • Scrub target area with chlorhexidine
    • Mark the site

TIMEOUT! 

…and document it:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

STERILIZE.

Watch this video. 

From EMCrit.org, Scott Weingart, RACC Sterile Line Preparation

Continue reading

The Central Line Part 1: The Basics

a blog series on emergency medicine procedures

In this first installment on central lines, we discuss central line indications/contraindications/alternatives, anatomic considerations, and the upsides and downsides of the 3 major sites (subclavian, internal jugular, and femoral)

Indications specific to the ER

  • Administration of harsh or concentrated fluids
  • High volume, high flow fluid administration
  • Emergency venous access
    • Alternatives: EJ, IO, ultrasound-guided peripheral IV
  • Conduit for transvenous pacer or dialysis catheter

Contraindications

  1. Soft tissue infection overlying site
  2. Traumatic or congenital distortions
  3. Superior vena cava syndrome
  4. Deep venous thrombosis in vessel of choice
  5. Coagulopathies
  6. Combative or uncooperative patients

troubleshooting

TROUBLESHOOTING: How to solve the above contraindications…

  • 1-4: move to another site
  • 5: consider reversal agents
  • 6: consider sedation and/or intubation, depending on the case
LOCATION

SUBCLAVIAN

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

From Netter’s Atlas of Human Anatomy, 4th ed, 2006 

Pathway

Subclavian vein and IJ –> brachiocephalic vein + contralateral brachiocephalic vein –> SVC

Where it is

Posterior to medial 1/3 of clavicle AND anterior to 1st rib

Anatomic awareness Continue reading

ROCKstars – Case 1: US-Guided Central Venous Access (CIV)

brownsound 2

An elderly patient is in the RIH Critical Care bay with severe sepsis and needs central access.  Luckily, Drs. Adam “Hyperechoic” Haag and Eddie “Rule ‘Em Out” Ruhland are on shift.  They settle on the right Internal Jugular vein, but traditional sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM) and clavicular bone landmarks are not apparent.  So a linear-array probe is correctly placed transversely over the triangle formed by the bifurcation of the SCM, to where the IJ and Carotid are seen in parallel…but there is some sort of hyperechoic, noncompressible mass…

They identify the thrombus, and instead find the Femoral vein, where CIV access is successfully achieved on the first attempt with no immediate complications.  The use of US to guide this procedure changed this patient’s course and potentially saved a complication.  

But exactly how much safer, faster, and more reliable is US-guided CIV placement?

THE ISSUE

  • Vascular access is critical in emergent situations
  • Body habitus, dehydration, poor perfusion, anatomical abnormalities, or history of IVDU can cause difficulties and delays when using landmark-based techniques
  • Complications of CIV placement include arterial puncture, excessive bleeding, vessel laceration, pneumothorax, hemothorax, and necessitation of multiple attempts
  • US guidance was identified in 2001 by United States Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality as one of the top 11 means of increasing patient safety, but this was based on one study of subclavian lines at one large urban center (1)

The “SOAP-3” Trial (2005)

  • A concealed, randomized, controlled study of 201 patients
  • Studies dating back to the 1990s in EM and Anesthesia (4) had demonstrated the efficacy of ultrasound-guidance, but this was the first study in the ED setting comparing the anatomical landmark method, the static “quick look” US-guided method, and dynamic “real time” US-guided method
  • In the “quick look” group, US was used to identify landmarks, the skin was marked, and the catheter was placed without real-time US guidance
  • EM residents and Attendings passed a 1h training course, then placed 10 CIVs with dynamic US guidance to qualify to participate

RESULTS

Dynamic

US Guidance

Static

US Guidance

Anatomical Landmarks Method
Overall Success 98% 82% 64%
First-Attempt Success

(OR vs LM)

5.8 3.4
Avg # of Attempts 1.7 1.6 3.2
Avg Total Sec 30 20 150
Complications 2 2 8

DISCUSSION

  • Dynamic guidance is superior but requires the most training
  • Static guidance is vastly superior to Landmark, and while slightly inferior to Dynamic, it requires less training
  • 10% of the study patients had “extremely narrow” (<5mm) IJs bilaterally, which could explain the inferior performance of the LM technique, even with experienced practitioners
  • All the complications were arterial punctures, and these were not statistically significant

References

  1. Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (AHRQ). Evidence Report/Technology Assessment: Number 43. Making Health Care Safer. A Critical Analysis of Patient Safety Practices: Summary 2001. 2007.
  1. Milling, et al. Randomized, controlled clinical trial of point-of-care limited ultrasonography assistance of central venous cannulation: The Third Sonography Outcomes Assessment Program (SOAP-3) Trial.  Critical Care Medicine, 2005, Aug;33(8); 1764-9.
  1. Sulek et al.  A Randomized Study of Left versus Right Internal Jugular Vein Cannulation in Adults.  J Clin Anesth, 2000, Mar; 12(2): 142-5
  1. www.sonoguide.com/line_placement.html