0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Mind the GAHP: A novel protocol for improved vascular access in the hypotensive patient

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Obtaining intravenous access in hypotensive patients is challenging and may critically delay resuscitation. The Graduated Vascular Access for Hypotensive Patient (GAHP) protocol leverages intraosseous fluid boluses to specifically dilate proximal veins. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of GAHP in maximizing venous targets through early distal intraosseous access and a small fluid bolus.

          Methods

          This was a prospective randomized cadaveric pilot study to evaluate extremity venous engorgement during intraosseous infusion. Cadavers (n = 23) had an intraosseous needle inserted into four sites: distal radius, proximal humerus, distal femur, and distal tibia. Intraosseous saline was rapidly infused, venous optimization was measured using real-time ultrasound. Primary outcome was maximum vessel circumference increase with intraosseous infusion. Secondary outcomes were: time to maximum circumference, and infusion volume required. Statistical analyses included Levene’s test for equality of variances, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and generalized estimating equation.

          Results

          There was a significant mean increase of 1.03 cm (95% CI 0.86, 1.20), representing a difference of 102%. We found no significant difference in time to optimize vessel circumference across sites, but volume required significantly differed.

          Conclusion

          GAHP quickly and effectively increased the circumference of anatomically adjacent veins. Anatomical sites did not differ on time to reach maximum enlargement of vessels following intraosseous infusion but did differ in terms of volume required to maximize vessel circumference. Further research is needed using live, hypotensive patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comparison of intraosseous versus central venous vascular access in adults under resuscitation in the emergency department with inaccessible peripheral veins.

          Current European Resuscitation Council (ERC) guidelines recommend intraosseous (IO) vascular access, if intravenous (IV) access is not readily available. Because central venous catheterisation (CVC) is an established alternative for in-hospital resuscitation, we compared IO access versus landmark-based CVC in adults with difficult peripheral veins. In this prospective observational study we investigated success rates on first attempt and procedure times of IO access versus central venous catheterisation (CVC) in adults (≥ 18 years of age) with inaccessible peripheral veins under trauma or medical resuscitation in a level I trauma centre emergency department. Forty consecutive adults under resuscitation were analysed, each receiving IO access and CVC simultaneously. Success rates on first attempt were significantly higher for IO cannulation than CVC (85% versus 60%, p=0.024) and procedure times were significantly lower for IO access compared to CVC (2.0 versus 8.0 min, p<0.001). As for complications, failure of IO access was observed in 6 patients, while 2 or more attempts of CVC were necessary in 16 patients. No other relevant complications like infection, bleeding or pneumothorax were observed. IO vascular access is a reliable bridging method to gain vascular access for in-hospital adult patients under resuscitation with difficult peripheral veins. Moreover, IO access is more efficacious with a higher success rate on first attempt and a lower procedure time compared to landmark-based CVC. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Anatomic considerations for central venous cannulation

            Central venous cannulation is a commonly performed procedure which facilitates resuscitation, nutritional support, and long-term vascular access. Mechanical complications most often occur during insertion and are intimately related to the anatomic relationship of the central veins. Working knowledge of surface and deep anatomy minimizes complications. Use of surface anatomic landmarks to orient the deep course of cannulating needle tracts appropriately comprises the crux of complication avoidance. The authors describe use of surface landmarks to facilitate safe placement of internal jugular, subclavian, and femoral venous catheters. The role of real-time sonography as a safety-enhancing adjunct is reviewed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              What you see (sonographically) is what you get: vein and patient characteristics associated with successful ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous placement in patients with difficult access.

              Ultrasound (US) has been shown to facilitate peripheral intravenous (IV) placement in emergency department (ED) patients with difficult IV access (DIVA). This study sought to define patient and vein characteristics that affect successful US-guided peripheral IV placement. This was a prospective observational study of US-guided IV placement in a convenience sample of DIVA patients in an urban, tertiary care ED. DIVA patients were defined as having any of the following: at least two failed IV attempts or a history of difficult access plus the inability to visualize or palpate any veins on physical exam. Patient characteristics (demographic information, vital signs, and medical history) were collected on enrolled patients. The relationships between patient characteristics, vein depth and diameter, US probe orientation, and successful IV placement were analyzed. A total of 169 patients were enrolled, with 236 attempts at access. Increasing vessel diameter was associated with a higher likelihood of success (odds ratio [OR] = 1.79 per 0.1-cm increase in vessel diameter, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.37 to 2.34). Increasing vessel depth did not affect success rates (OR = 0.96 per 0.1-cm increase of depth, 95% CI = 0.89 to 1.04) until a threshold depth of 1.6 cm, beyond which no vessels were successfully cannulated. Probe orientation and patient characteristics were unrelated to success. Success was solely related to vessel characteristics detected with US and not influenced by patient characteristics or probe orientation. Successful DIVA was primarily associated with larger vessel, while vessel depth up to >1.6 cm and patient characteristics were unrelated to success. Clinically, if two vessels are identified at a depth of <1.6 cm, the larger diameter vessel, even if comparatively deeper, should yield the greatest likelihood of success.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Resusc Plus
                Resusc Plus
                Resuscitation Plus
                Elsevier
                2666-5204
                16 July 2024
                September 2024
                16 July 2024
                : 19
                : 100714
                Affiliations
                [a ]University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, 4502 Medical Dr, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA
                [b ]Brooke Army Medical Center, 3551 Roger Brooke Dr. San Antonio, TX 78234, USA
                [c ]Centre for Emergency Health Sciences, 353 Rodeo Dr, Spring Branch, TX 78070, USA
                [d ]University of Texas Southwestern, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX 75390, USA
                [e ]Wayne State University School of Medicine, 540 E Canfield St, Detroit, MI 48201, USA
                [f ]Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Hospital Ave, Nedlands WA 6009, Australia
                [g ]Duke University, 2301 Erwin Rd, Durham, NC 27710, USA
                [h ]University of Colorado School of Medicine, 13001 E 17th Pl, Aurora, CO 80045, USA
                [i ]Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, 8 College Rd, 16985, Singapore
                [j ]Singapore General Hospital, Outram Rd, 169608, Singapore
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: Brooke Army Medical Center, 3551 Roger Brooke Drive, San Antonio, Texas 78234, USA. mathew.a.saab@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                S2666-5204(24)00165-6 100714
                10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100714
                11298653
                39104444
                927ffcac-dc56-4c29-a8e1-55dd01265d72
                Crown Copyright © 2024 Published by Elsevier B.V.

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 2 April 2024
                : 27 June 2024
                : 29 June 2024
                Categories
                Experimental Paper

                graduated vascular access,hypotensive,intraosseous,resuscitation,shock

                Comments

                Comment on this article