Skip to main content

Advertisement

Volume 3 Supplement 1

ESICM LIVES 2015

Comparison of ultrasound guidance for axillary or subclavian vein catheterization: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

Article metrics

  • 783 Accesses

Introduction

Axillary vein catheterization appears as an interesting alternative to subclavian vein catheterization (SVC) under ultrasound (US) guidance.[1]

Objectives

The aim of this trial was to compare the two approaches.

Methods

Randomized non-inferiority single-centre study. All patients admitted in intensive care unit (ICU) or operating room, requiring a central vein catheterization (CVC) without contraindication for SVC, were randomly assigned to subclavian or axillary groups. The primary endpoint was to compare success rate of each approach. The secondary endpoints were: strategy success rates, catheter position and complications. Strategy of CVC consisted in using the allocated approach and switching to the non-allocated approach after two failed punctures.

Results

122/132 included patients were analysed (60 and 62 in subclavian and axillary group, respectively). The approach success rates for subclavian and axillary sites were 87.7% and 85.5%, respectively (difference -2.2%, 90%CI [-12.5%-8.1%], non-inferiority p = 0.18). The subclavian and axillary strategy success rates were 96.5% and 98.4%, respectively (difference -1.9%, 90%CI [-4.9%-8.7%], non-inferiority p < 0.01). Thrombogenic catheter positions were 7 (12.3%) in subclavian group vs. 19 (31.7%) in axillary group (p = 0.01). Complications were comparable in the two groups (2 (3.3%) vs. 4 (6.5%), p = 0.68).

Conclusions

In terms of absolute success rate, axillary is not non-inferior to subclavian approach. In terms of strategy success rate, axillary is non-inferior to subclavian approach. After two failed subclavian approaches, changing for axillary approach leads to 98% success rate. Although associated with more thrombogenic catheter extremity position, axillary approach can be considered as a rescue alternative after subclavian approach failure.

Table 1 Success rates for subclavian and axillary groups.

References

  1. 1.

    Sharma A, Bodenham AR, Mallick A: Ultrasound-guided infraclavicular axillary vein cannulation for central venous access. Br J Anaesth. 2004, 93: 188-92. 10.1093/bja/aeh187.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to B Louart.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Louart, B., Buzançais, G., Roger, C. et al. Comparison of ultrasound guidance for axillary or subclavian vein catheterization: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial. ICMx 3, A614 (2015) doi:10.1186/2197-425X-3-S1-A614

Download citation

Keywords

  • Catheter Position
  • Axillary Vein
  • Rescue Alternative
  • Axillary Approach
  • Compare Success Rate