DefinePK

DefinePK hosts the largest index of Pakistani journals, research articles, news headlines, and videos. It also offers chapter-level book search.

Comparison between the efficacy of in-plane vs out-of-plane needle technique for ultrasound guided intravascular access


Article Information

Title: Comparison between the efficacy of in-plane vs out-of-plane needle technique for ultrasound guided intravascular access

Authors: Hira Khalil, Riffat Zahid, Unais Ahmed, Syed Mehmood Ali , Tayyaba Mumtaz, Hafsa Hafeez Hafsa Hafeez

Journal: Medical Journal of South Punjab

HEC Recognition History
Category From To
Y 2024-10-01 2025-12-31
Y 2023-07-01 2024-09-30

Publisher: MEDTEACH (Private) Limited

Country: Pakistan

Year: 2025

Volume: 6

Issue: 3

Language: en

DOI: 10.61581/mjsp.v6i3.359

Keywords: Cardiac surgical proceduresCatheterizationCentral VenousIn plane Needleout plane needle

Categories

Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy in terms of first pass success rate of in-plane vs out-of-plane needle technique for ultrasound guided central venous catheterization.
Methodology: Randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Anesthesia Department, Shaikh Zayed Hospital Lahore, for a duration of 6 months i.e. from Jan 16, 2025 till June 15, 2025. After obtaining written informed consent, 280 patients who met the selection criteria were enrolled and were split into two equal-number groups using the lottery technique.i.e. 140 in each group. Patients in Group A underwent internal jugular vein catheterization via in-plane approach and Group B underwent out-of-plane approach. Outcomes were assessed and were statistically analyzed.
Results: The mean age of the patients in Group A was 5211.49 years and in Group B was 5111.32 years. The mean time take for CVC in Group A was 557.71 seconds and in Group B was 427.29 seconds (p<0.001). The mean number of needle passes in Group A were 21.21 and in Group B were 10.55 (p=0.02). In Group A, the in-plane approach was efficacious in 87% patients compared to out-of-plane approach which was efficacious in 84.3% patients (p=0.495)
Conclusion: There was no discernible difference in the effectiveness of the in-plane and out-of-plane approaches for CVC in patients undergoing heart surgery.


Paper summary is not available for this article yet.

Loading PDF...

Loading Statistics...