The incidence and risk of central venous catheter malpositioning: a prospective cohort study in 1619 patients.

Central venous catheters are used in various hospital wards. An anterior-posterior chest X-ray is usually obtained soon after cannulation to assess the location of the catheter tip. This prospective clinical study was designed to determine the radiographic catheter tip position after central venous cannulation by various routes, to identify clinical problems possibly associated with the use of malpositioned catheters and to make a cost-benefit analysis of routine chest X-ray with respect to catheter malposition. A total 1619 central venous cannulations were recorded during a three-year period with respect to patient data, information about the cannulation procedures, the radiographic catheter positions and complications during clinical use. The total incidence of radiographic catheter tip malposition, defined as extrathoracic or ventricular positioning, was 3.3% (confidence interval 25 to 4.3%). Cannulation by the right subclavian vein was associated with the highest risk of malposition, 9.1%, compared with 1.4% by the right internal jugular vein. Six of the 53 malpositioned catheters were removed or adjusted. No case of malposition was associated with vascular perforation, local venous thrombosis or cerebral symptoms. We conclude that the radiographic incidence of central venous catheter malpositioning is low and that clinical use of malpositioned catheters is associated with few complications. However, determination of the catheter position by chest X-ray should be considered when mechanical complications cannot be excluded, aspiration of venous blood is not possible, or the catheter is intended for central venous pressure monitoring, high flow use or infusion of local irritant drugs.

Patency assessment of the internal jugular vein after neck dissection.

Twenty-seven patients with oral malignant tumours, who underwent neck dissection with preservation of the internal jugular vein (IJV), were studied retrospectively to evaluate patency of the IJV. Twenty-three patients underwent ablative surgery of the primary lesion with neck dissection and 4 underwent neck dissection alone. Three patients received simple closure and skin grafting of the primary lesion, and 20 received reconstruction surgery (4 platysma flaps, 3 radial forearm flaps, 3 lateral upper arm flaps, 2 pectoralis major myocutaneous flaps and 8 rectus abdominis myocutaneous flaps). The maximum and minimum diameters of the IJV as measured on computed tomographic (CT) scans were used to assess patency. The cross-sectional area of the IJV and the ratio of its long axis to short axis (L/S ratio) were calculated. The relation between the change in IJV status and the type of flap used for reconstruction was also examined. Occlusion of the IJV was present in 3.7% of the patients, and 'narrowing' was present in 63.6%. The size of the flap significantly correlated with 'narrowing' of the IJV, suggesting that 'narrowing' was caused mainly by compression due to the flap.

Penetrating neck trauma: sensitivity of clinical examination and cost-effectiveness of angiography.

PURPOSE: To evaluate penetrating neck trauma for (a) sensitivity of the clinical examination as an indicator of clinically significant vascular injury, and (b) cost-effectiveness of performing screening diagnostic angiography. METHODS: The medical records of all patients with penetrating neck trauma presenting at our institution over 4 years were retrospectively reviewed. Injuries were classified into one of three anatomic zones and classified into four mutually exclusive groups based on the extent of vascular injury; (a) no vascular injury; (b) minor vascular abnormality; (c) major vascular abnormality without a change in clinical management; or (d) any injury requiring a change in clinical management. Cost data were also obtained for each patient's hospitalization. RESULTS: There were 111 patients with penetrating neck trauma. No statistically significant difference between the sensitivities of the clinical examination or angiography for the detection of vascular injury were detected. Of the 48 patients who had vascular injuries, 45 had an abnormal clinical findings (93.7% sensitivity). None of the remaining 3 patients with vascular injury and normal clinical findings would have had their treatment altered by the results of angiography. The calculated cost of using angiography as a screening tool for vascular injury in patients with normal clinical findings was approximately $3.08 million per central nervous system event prevented. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that in patients with zone II penetrating neck injuries the clinical examination is sufficient to detect significant vascular lesions and that screening angiography may not be indicated. Because our sample size was relatively small and the mean follow-up only 13.3 days, further investigation is needed to demonstrate definitively the lack of usefulness of screening angiography.