Ultrasound-guided central line placement has been shown to decrease the number of needle puncture attempts, complication, and failure rates. In order to obtain successful central access, it is important to have adequate cognitive knowledge, workflow understanding, and manual dexterity to safely execute this invasive procedure. The operator should also be familiar with the anatomical variations, equipment operations, and potential complications and their prevention. In this article, we present a detailed review of ultrasound-guided central venous access. It includes a description of anatomy, operative technique, equipment operation, and techniques for specific situations. We describe the use of ultrasound guidance to avoid and identify various complications associated with this procedure. We have also reviewed recent recommendations and guidelines for the use of ultrasound for central venous access and the current evidence pertaining to the recommendations for the expected level of training, methodology, and metrics for establishing competency.

Central venous catheters (CVCs) can help with diagnosis and treatment of the critically ill. The catheter may be placed in a large vein in the neck (internal jugular vein), upper chest (subclavian vein) or groin (femoral vein). Whilst this is beneficial overall, inserting the catheter risks arterial puncture and other complications and should be performed with as few attempts as possible. Traditionally, anatomical 'landmarks' on the body surface were used to find the correct place in which to insert catheters, but ultrasound imaging is now available. A Doppler mode is sometimes used to supplement plain 'two-dimensional' ultrasound.

The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of two-dimensional (imaging ultrasound (US) or ultrasound Doppler (USD)) guided puncture techniques for insertion of central venous catheters via the internal jugular vein in adults and children. We assessed whether there was a difference in complication rates between traditional landmark-guided and any ultrasound-guided central vein puncture.Our secondary objectives were to assess whether the effect differs between US and USD; whether the effect differs between ultrasound used throughout the puncture ('direct') and ultrasound used only to identify and mark the vein before the start of the puncture procedure (indirect'); and whether the effect differs between different groups of patients or between different levels of experience among those inserting the catheters.

We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to 15 January 2013), EMBASE (1966 to 15 January 2013), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to 15 January 2013 ), reference lists of articles, 'grey literature' and dissertations. An additional handsearch focused on intensive care and anaesthesia journals and abstracts and proceedings of scientific meetings. We attempted to identify unpublished or ongoing studies by contacting companies and experts in the field, and we searched trial registers. We reran the search in August 2014. We will deal with identified studies of interest when we update the review.

We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing two-dimensional ultrasound or Doppler ultrasound with an anatomical 'landmark' technique during insertion of internal jugular venous catheters in both adults and children.

Three review authors independently extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest using a standardized form. A priori, we aimed to perform subgroup analyses, when possible, for adults and children, and for experienced operators and inexperienced operators.

Of 735 identified citations, 35 studies enrolling 5108 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The quality of evidence was very low for most of the outcomes and was moderate at best for four of the outcomes. Most trials had an unclear risk of bias across the six domains, and heterogeneity among the studies was significant.Use of two-dimensional ultrasound reduced the rate of total complications overall by 71% (14 trials, 2406 participants, risk ratio (RR) 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.52; P value < 0.0001, I² = 57%), and the number of participants with an inadvertent arterial puncture by 72% (22 trials, 4388 participants, RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.44; P value < 0.00001, I² = 35%). Overall success rates were modestly increased in all groups combined at 12% (23 trials, 4340 participants, RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.17; P value < 0.00001, I² = 85%), and similar benefit was noted across all subgroups. The number of attempts needed for successful cannulation was decreased overall (16 trials, 3302 participants, mean difference (MD) -1.19 attempts, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.92; P value < 0.00001, I² = 96%) and in all subgroups. Use of two-dimensional ultrasound increased the chance of success at the first attempt by 57% (18 trials, 2681 participants, RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.82; P value < 0.00001, I² = 82%) and reduced the chance of haematoma formation (overall reduction 73%, 13 trials, 3233 participants, RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.55; P value 0.0004, I² = 54%). Use of two-dimensional ultrasound decreased the time to successful cannulation by 30.52 seconds (MD -30.52 seconds, 95% CI -55.21 to -5.82; P value 0.02, I² = 97%). Additional data are available to support use of ultrasound during, not simply before, line insertion.Use of Doppler ultrasound increased the chance of success at the first attempt by 58% (four trials, 199 participants, RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.43; P value 0.04, I² = 57%). No evidence showed a difference for the total numbers of perioperative and postoperative complications/adverse events (three trials, 93 participants, RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.71; P value 0.28), the overall success rate (seven trials, 289 participants, RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.25; P value 0.20), the total number of attempts until success (two trials, 69 participants, MD -0.63, 95% CI -1.92 to 0.66; P value 0.34), the overall number of participants with an arterial puncture (six trials, 213 participants, RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.73; P value 0.35) and time to successful cannulation (five trials, 214 participants, each using a different definition for this outcome; MD 62.04 seconds, 95% CI -13.47 to 137.55; P value 0.11) when Doppler ultrasound was used. It was not possible to perform analyses for the other outcomes because they were reported in only one trial.

Based on available data, we conclude that two-dimensional ultrasound offers gains in safety and quality when compared with an anatomical landmark technique. Because of missing data, we did not compare effects with experienced versus inexperienced operators for all outcomes (arterial puncture, haematoma formation, other complications, success with attempt number one), and so the relative utility of ultrasound in these groups remains unclear and no data are available on use of this technique in patients at high risk of complications. The results for Doppler ultrasound techniques versus anatomical landmark techniques are also uncertain.

Central venous catheters can help with diagnosis and treatment of the critically ill. The catheter may be placed in a large vein in the neck (internal jugular vein), upper chest (subclavian vein) or groin (femoral vein). Whilst this is beneficial overall, inserting the catheter risks arterial puncture and other complications and should be performed in as few attempts as possible.In the past, anatomical 'landmarks' on the body surface were used to find the correct place to insert these catheters, but ultrasound imaging is now available. A Doppler mode is sometimes used to supplement plain 'two-dimensional' ultrasound.

The primary objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of two-dimensional ultrasound (US)- or Doppler ultrasound (USD)-guided puncture techniques for subclavian vein, axillary vein and femoral vein puncture during central venous catheter insertion in adults and children. We assessed whether there was a difference in complication rates between traditional landmark-guided and any ultrasound-guided central vein puncture.When possible, we also assessed the following secondary objectives: whether a possible difference could be verified with use of the US technique versus the USD technique; whether there was a difference between using ultrasound throughout the puncture ('direct') and using it only to identify and mark the vein before starting the puncture procedure ('indirect'); and whether these possible differences might be evident in different groups of patients or with different levels of experience among those inserting the catheters.

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to 15 January 2013), EMBASE (1966 to 15 January 2013), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to 15 January 2013), reference lists of articles, 'grey literature' and dissertations. An additional handsearch focused on intensive care and anaesthesia journals and abstracts and proceedings of scientific meetings. We attempted to identify unpublished or ongoing studies by contacting companies and experts in the field, and we searched trial registers. We reran the search in August 2014. We will deal with any studies of interest when we update the review.

Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing two-dimensional ultrasound or Doppler ultrasound versus an anatomical 'landmark' technique during insertion of subclavian or femoral venous catheters in both adults and children.

Three review authors independently extracted data on methodological quality, participants, interventions and outcomes of interest using a standardized form. We performed a priori subgroup analyses.

Altogether 13 studies enrolling 2341 participants (and involving 2360 procedures) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The quality of evidence was very low (subclavian vein N = 3) or low (subclavian vein N = 4, femoral vein N = 2) for most outcomes, moderate for one outcome (femoral vein) and high at best for two outcomes (subclavian vein N = 1, femoral vein N = 1). Most of the trials had unclear risk of bias across the six domains, and heterogeneity among the studies was significant.For the subclavian vein (nine studies, 2030 participants, 2049 procedures), two-dimensional ultrasound reduced the risk of inadvertent arterial puncture (three trials, 498 participants, risk ratio (RR) 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.82; P value 0.02, I² = 0%) and haematoma formation (three trials, 498 participants, RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.76; P value 0.01, I² = 0%). No evidence was found of a difference in total or other complications (together, US, USD), overall (together, US, USD), number of attempts until success (US) or first-time (US) success rates or time taken to insert the catheter (US).For the femoral vein, fewer data were available for analysis (four studies, 311 participants, 311 procedures). No evidence was found of a difference in inadvertent arterial puncture or other complications. However, success on the first attempt was more likely with ultrasound (three trials, 224 participants, RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.22; P value < 0.0001, I² = 31%), and a small increase in the overall success rate was noted (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.23; P value 0.06, I² = 50%). No data on mortality or participant-reported outcomes were provided.

On the basis of available data, we conclude that two-dimensional ultrasound offers small gains in safety and quality when compared with an anatomical landmark technique for subclavian (arterial puncture, haematoma formation) or femoral vein (success on the first attempt) cannulation for central vein catheterization. Data on insertion by inexperienced or experienced users, or on patients at high risk for complications, are lacking. The results for Doppler ultrasound techniques versus anatomical landmark techniques are uncertain.

Venous access devices are of pivotal importance for an increasing number of critically ill patients in a variety of disease states and in a variety of clinical settings (emergency, intensive care, surgery) and for different purposes (fluids or drugs infusions, parenteral nutrition, antibiotic therapy, hemodynamic monitoring, procedures of dialysis/apheresis). However, healthcare professionals are commonly worried about the possible consequences that may result using a central venous access device (CVAD) (mainly, bloodstream infections and thrombosis), both peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs). This review aims to discuss indications, insertion techniques, and care of PICCs in critically ill patients. PICCs have many advantages over standard CICCs. First of all, their insertion is easy and safe -due to their placement into peripheral veins of the arm- and the advantage of a central location of catheter tip suitable for all osmolarity and pH solutions. Using the ultrasound-guidance for the PICC insertion, the risk of hemothorax and pneumothorax can be avoided, as well as the possibility of primary malposition is very low. PICC placement is also appropriate to avoid post-procedural hemorrhage in patients with an abnormal coagulative state who need a CVAD. Some limits previously ascribed to PICCs (i.e., low flow rates, difficult central venous pressure monitoring, lack of safety for radio-diagnostic procedures, single-lumen) have delayed their start up in the intensive care units as common practice. Though, the recent development of power-injectable PICCs overcomes these technical limitations and PICCs have started to spread in critical care settings. Two important take-home messages may be drawn from this review. First, the incidence of complications varies depending on venous accesses and healthcare professionals should be aware of the different clinical performance as well as of the different risks associated with each type of CVAD (CICCs or PICCs). Second, an inappropriate CVAD choice and, particularly, an inadequate insertion technique are relevant-and often not recognized-potential risk factors for complications in critically ill patients. We strongly believe that all healthcare professionals involved in the choice, insertion or management of CVADs in critically ill patients should know all potential risk factors of complications. This knowledge may minimize complications and guarantee longevity to the CVAD optimizing the risk/benefit ratio of CVAD insertion and use. Proper management of CVADs in critical care saves lines and lives. Much evidence from the medical literature and from the clinical practice supports our belief that, compared to CICCs, the so-called power-injectable peripherally inserted central catheters are a good alternative choice in critical care.

The objective was to assess clinician experience, training, and attitudes toward central venous catheterization (CVC) in adult emergency department (ED) patients in a health system promoting increased utilization of CVC for severely septic ED patients.

The authors surveyed all emergency physicians (EPs) within a 21-hospital integrated health care delivery system that had recently instituted a modified Rivers protocol for providing early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) to patients with severe sepsis or septic shock, including CVC if indicated. This initiative was accompanied by a structured, but optional, systemwide hands-on training for EPs in real-time ultrasound-guided CVC (US CVC). EPs' responses to questions regarding self-reported experience with CVC in the ED are reported. Data included frequency of CVC (by type) and US CVC training opportunities: both during and after residency and informal ("on-the-job training involving actual ED patients under the oversight of someone more experienced than yourself") and formal ("off-the-job training not involving actual ED patients"). The survey also asked respondents to report their comfort levels with different types of CVC as well as their agreement with possible barriers (philosophical, time-related, equipment-related, and complication-related) to CVC in the ED. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression was used to identify provider characteristics and responses associated with higher yearly CVC volumes.

The survey response rate among eligible participants was 365 of 465 (78%). Overall, 154 of 365 (42%) respondents reported performing 11 or more CVCs a year, while 46 of 365 (13%) reported doing two or fewer. Concerning CVC techniques, 271 of 358 (76%) of respondents reported being comfortable with the internal jugular approach with US guidance, compared to 200 of 345 (58%) with the subclavian approach without US. Training rates were reported as 1) in residency, formal 167 of 358 (47%) and informal 189 of 364 (52%); and 2) postresidency, formal 236 of 359 (66%) and informal 260 of 365 (71%). The most commonly self-reported barriers to CVC were procedural time (56%) and complication risk (61%). After multivariate adjustment, the following were significantly associated with greater self-reported CVC use (p < 0.01): 1) informal bedside CVC training after residency, 2) male sex, 3) disagreement with complication-related barrier questions, and 4) self-reported comfort with placing US-guided internal jugular catheters.

In this cross-sectional survey-based study, EPs reported varying experience with CVC in the ED and reported high comfort with the US CVC technique. Postresidency informal training experience, male sex, negative responses to complication-related barrier questions, and comfort with placing US-guided internal jugular catheters were associated with yearly CVC volume. These results suggest that higher rates of CVC in eligible patients might be achieved by informal training programs in US and/or by disseminating existing evidence about the low risk of complications associated with the procedure.

The aim of our study was to describe the anatomic relationships in internal jugular (IJV), subclavian (SCV), and femoral (FV) vein sites.

One hundred and forty-two children had a two-dimensional (2D) ultrasound (US) evaluation of IJV, SCV, and FV sites. They were enrolled according to their age: 0-1 month old (n=9), 1 month old to 2 yr old (n=61), 2-6 yr old (n=22), 6-12 yr old (n=32), and 12-18 yr old (n=18).

We found about 7.7% variation for the IJV. The most common anatomic variations were a lateral (nine children) or anterior (nine children) position of the IJV to the carotid artery. Regardless of the age category, about 9.8% of the anatomic variations were found for the FV. The most common anatomic variation in our study was that the FV ran anteromedially to the femoral artery (17 children). Anatomic variation of the SCV, regardless of age category, was about 7.4%. The most common anatomic variation was the SCV, which ran medially (10 children) to the subclavian artery.

The relevant percentages of anatomic variations obtained for all these areas support at least a systematic US screening before attempting to obtain central venous access, ideally using a US-guided technique.

To evaluate the evidence base and rationale underpinning the various infections control strategies during central venous catheter insertion and to promote discussion about the key, recurring concepts and recommendations in the literature. Logistical and organisational factors relating to central venous catheter insertion are also examined.

Catheter-related bloodstream infections following the insertion of central venous catheters are associated with significant patient mortality and morbidity, prolonged hospital stays and increased economic costs. Limited published literature specifically examines microbial contamination during the peri-insertion process.

An integrative literature review supervised by a health informatics librarian was undertaken. On the basis of these data, considerations for clinical practice are provided. Retrieved articles were categorised under the following themes: risk of contamination at insertion; clinical and organisational impact of contamination; strategies for reducing contamination; controversies and challenges with decontamination strategies; recommendations for practice and implications for further research and organisational practice.

Specific recommendations for reducing catheter-related bloodstream infections based on recurring themes include the following: reducing microbial burden on skin prior to the central venous catheter insertion; decreasing contact of gloves and insertion equipment with the patient's skin; using specifically trained staff to prepare and maintain a sterile field; and ensuring a sterile technique is adhered to throughout the central venous catheter insertion process. The need for organisational, procedural and clinical practices to support better healthcare outcomes is demonstrated. Highlighting the importance of executive support and regular review of policy and guidelines are necessary to improve patient outcomes.

Preventing infections related to central venous catheters requires the integration of clinical, organisational and workforce factors.

The aim of this study was to compare two approaches used for internal jugular venous cannulation: the anterior way, described by English et al. and the posterior way, described by Jernigan et al. The primary endpoint was the rate of success. The secondary endpoints were the related adverse events and the difficulty factors.

Prospective, randomized open clinical trial.

The study took place in the vital emergency room, the operating room and the emergency intensive care unit of Ibn Sina University hospital (Rabat, Morocco), between June and September 2010. Hundred and one patients needing a central venous catheter were randomized to undergo one of the two techniques. We compared: demographics, success rates, number of attempts, difficulty factors and adverse events.

The success rate was significantly higher in the posterior group (96% versus 68%, P < 0.001), with fewer attempts (1.3 ± 0.7 versus 2.1 ± 1.3; P < 0.001). There were less pneumothorax, (0 versus 6%) and more accidental arterial punctures (34 versus 25.5%) in the posterior group, but the difference wasn't significant. Finally, none of the difficulty factors were correlated to the failure rate.

This study shows that the posterior approach in internal jugular venous cannulation is more efficient than and as safe as the anterior approach.

Central venous catheterization is increasingly performed as a temporary vascular access for hemodialysis therapy in developing countries and it can be associated with serious complications. Iatrogenic common carotid artery-jugular vein arteriovenous fistula is a rare but serious complication of internal jugular vein catheterization for hemodialysis access. Few cases of such complication of uremic patients on hemodialysis have been reported in the literature.

To report a case of iatrogenic common carotid artery-jugular vein arteriovenous fistula caused by internal jugular vein catheterization of a hemodialysis patient and its surgical repair.

The iatrogenic arteriovenous fistula was repaired.

Acquaintance of anatomical landmarks, careful preparation, experience of the physician and the ultrasound guidance are important factors to reduce the risk of complications during internal jugular vein catheterization. Surgical repair should be performed earlier in order to avoid the development of other serious complications.

Recent advance in technology has developed a lot of new aspects of clinical monitoring. We can monitor sedation levels during anesthesia using various electroencephalographic (EEG) indices, while it is still not useful for anesthesia depth monitoring. Some attempts are made to monitor the changes in sympathetic nerve activity as one of the indicators of stress, pain/analgesia, or anesthesia. To know the balance of sympathetic and parasympathetic activity, heart rate or blood pressure variability is investigated. For trend of cardiac output, low invasive monitors have been investigated. Improvement of ultrasound enables us to see cardiac structure and function continuously and clearer, increases success rate and decreases complication of central venous puncture and various kinds of nerve blocks. Without inserting an arterial catheter, trends of arterial oxygen tension or carbon dioxide tension can be monitored. Indirect visualization of the airway decreases difficult intubation and makes it easier to teach tracheal intubation. The changes in blood volume can be speculated non-invasively. Cerebral perfusion and metabolism are not ordinary monitored yet, but some studies show their usefulness in management of critically ill. This review introduces recent advances in various monitors used in anesthesia and critical care including some studies of the author, especially focused on EEG and cardiac output. However, the most important is that these new monitors are not almighty but should be used adequately in a limited situation where their meaning is confirmed.

A 58-year-old female patient was scheduled for minimally invasive cardiac surgery. For drainage of venous blood to the heart-lung machine insertion of a central venous large diameter catheter was a prerequisite. During insertion into the right internal jugular vein by the anesthesiologist a life-threatening perforation of the subclavian artery occurred. The patient suffered hemorrhagic shock and advanced cardiac life support was carried out for approximately 18 min. Immediate surgical repair was successful and the originally planned operation was then performed. Concurrently, mild therapeutic hypothermia was established for 24 h to protect the cerebrum. Within 4 days the patient recovered without any neurological deficits.

Central venous catheterisation and arterial catheterisation are common procedures performed by anaesthetists. Traditionally, the technique of locating surface landmarks and palpation was used to assist in vascular access. The introduction of perioperative ultrasonography in the past decade has dramatically changed this procedure. In the United States and United Kingdom, guidelines have recommended the use of ultrasound guidance to reduce complications and improve success in central venous catheterisation. This article summarises the literature on complication rates, efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided vascular access procedures and describes a practical method of ultrasound-guided central venous access and arterial catheterisation.

Sound travels through objects that block light. Only very recently has technology advanced enough to decipher ultrasound for medical use. Machines have become smaller, cheaper, more versatile and more advanced than ever before. The medical use of ultrasound spreads across many fields so that traditional areas no longer have a monopoly. With this comes the question of training doctors. This has been done by various colleges and societies worldwide. Some have been quicker to act than others. There also needs to be an understanding of when broad experience and advanced technical skills are required or when limited skills will do. In addition, some procedures can be performed more safely with ultrasound where the knowledge of ultrasound is not paramount. This article covers current provision of training in echocardiography and ultrasound in areas relevant to anaesthetists who are working in critical care (including accident and emergency) and complex surgery (mainly cardiac).

Internal jugular vein (IJV) cannulation is a common practice procedure employed by anesthesiologists to access large central veins. The purpose of this study is to examine the accuracy of the use of superficial anatomical landmarks to locate the IJV as well as to delineate differences in accuracy at various levels of anesthesiology trainees, and staff.

We prospectively evaluated the accuracy of locating the left and right IJV on the skin surface by anesthesiology residents and board certified anesthesiologists. Twenty-four patients with body mass index (BMI) <30 and 24 morbidly obese patients with BMI > 40 were employed across all groups. Ultrasound imaging of the actual IJV course was utilized as a reference.

Experienced operators (Third year residents and faculty) achieved better accuracy in locating the IJV compared to first and second year residents. Higher accuracy was achieved when the carotid pulse was used as a landmark compared to the sternocleidomastoid muscle, particularly for experienced operators in morbidly obese patients. Overall, there was no difference in accuracy between the right and left IJV, although medial deviation was greater on the left side.

The accuracy of locating the IJV on the skin surface improved with operator experience in our anesthesiology training program. Experienced operators improved their accuracy using the carotid pulse as the external landmark. Ultrasound may be a useful tool to improve IJV localization early during training, and for cannulation of the left IJV.

Incidence of primary mechanical complications and malpositions associated with landmark-guided central venous access procedures (CVAP) performed by experienced operators.

Prospective 5-year observational study on two intensive care units.

Only CVAPs using Seldinger technique were evaluated. Age, gender, puncture site, number of cannulation attempts, and complications within 24 hours and malpositions were recorded.

782 CVAPs in females aged 9-92 yrs and 1012 CVAPs in males aged 6-89 yrs.

We analyzed 1794 (1017 right- and 777 left-sided CVAP), of which 87.7% were accomplished without adverse events. More than one cannulation attempt was a risk factor for failed catheterization, other mechanical complications but not for malposition. Complications/malpositions were encountered in 220 CVAPs.In 51 CVAPs (2.8%) the cannulation failed at the attempted site, here 18 CVAPs were accompanied by further complications (35.3%). Otherwise, the rate for mechanical complications was low (3.3%). The most common mechanical complications (n = 127) were arterial punctures (n = 52; 2.9%), including four arterial cannulations (0.2%), and pneumothorax (n = 9; 0.6%). There was significant risk for arterial puncture with the internal jugular vein approach in comparison to the innominate vein (p = 0.004), but not to the subclavian vein (p = 0.065). Male patients had a lower risk for failure (2.1%) than females (3.8%, p = 0.028). One-hundred-twenty-one central venous catheters were malpositioned (6.7%) of which 35 were related to the left internal jugular vein.

Even experienced operators cause a considerable number of early mechanical complications and malpositions. After two unsuccessful cannulation attempts failure and associated complications are very likely.