Digital imaging does not improve localization of percutaneously inserted central lines in neonates

Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health

Volumn 41, Issue 5-6, 2005, Pages 256-259

  Webster, Nicola J ^a   Page, Bernadette ^a   Kuschel, Carl A ^a   Battin, Malcolm R ^a,b,c  

^a NATIONAL WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^c National Women's Health   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Catheter; Neonates; Percutaneously inserted central lines; Tip position

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

CANNULATION; CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETERIZATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGING SYSTEM; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; NEWBORN INTENSIVE CARE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

ADMINISTRATION, CUTANEOUS; CATHETERIZATION, CENTRAL VENOUS; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; INTENSIVE CARE, NEONATAL; NEW ZEALAND; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOLOGY INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

EID: 22244472945     PISSN: 10344810     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2005.00606.x     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Ainsworth SB, Furness J, Fenton AC. Randomized comparative trial between percutaneous longlines and peripheral cannulae in the delivery of neonatal parenteral nutrition. Acta Paediatr. 2001; 90: 1016-20.
2. Fletcher SJ, Bodenham AR. Safe placement of central venous catheters: Where should the tip of the catheter lie? Br. J. Anaesth. 2000; 85: 188-91.
3. Beardsall K, White DK, Pinto EM, Kelsall AWR. Pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade as complications of neonatal long lines: Are they really a problem? Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2003; 88: F292-5.
4. Nadroo AM, Jing L, Green RS, Magid MS, Holzman IR. Death as a complication of peripherally inserted central catheters in neonates. J. Pediatr. 2001; 138: 599-601.
5. Department of Health. Review of four neonatal deaths due to cardiac tamponade associated with the presence of a central venous catheter. Recommendations and Department of Health response. http://www.doh.gov.uk/ manchesterbabies/manchreport.pdf.
6. Menon G. Neonatal long lines, are they safe? Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2003; 88: F260-2.
7. Radadio JM, Doellman DA, Johnson ND, Bean JA, Jacobs BR. Pediatric peripherally inserted central catheters: Complication rates related to catheter tip location. Pediatrics 2001; 107: e28.
8. Odd DE, Page B, Battin MR, Harding JE. Does radio-opaque contrast improve radiographic localisation of percutaneous central venous lines? Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2004; 89: F42-3.
9. Reece A, Ubhi T, Craig AR, Newell SJ. Positioning long lines: Contrast versus plain radiography. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2001;84:F129-30.
10. Evans A, Natarajan J, Davies CJ. Long line positioning in neonates: Does computed radiography improve visibilty? Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2004; 89: F44-5.
11. Bernard I, Banerjee. Image inversion. [eletter] Arch. Dis. Child. 2001 ; http://fn.bmjjournals.eom/cgi/eletters/84/2/F129.
12. Soni N, Becker M, Dixon H, Miles R. Identification of the tip of long lines using inversion of image technique on PACS. [e-letter] Arch. Dis. Child. 2002; http://fn.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/84/2/F129.
13. Leipala JA, Petaja J, Fellman V. Perforation complications of percutaneous central venous catheters in very low birth weight infants. J. Paediatr. Child. Health 2001; 37: 168-71.
14. Bloomfield FH, Teele RL, Voss M et al. Inter- and intra-observer variability in the assessment of atelectasis and consolidation in neonatal chest radiographs. Pediatr. Radiol. 1999; 29: 459-62.
15. Melbye H, Dale k. Interobserver variability in the radiographic diagnosis of outpatient pneumonia. Acta Radiol. 1992; 33: 79-81.
16. Brennan P, Silman A. Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures. Br. Med. J. 1992; 304: 1491-4.
17. Strickland NH. PACS (picture archiving and communication systems): Filmless radiology. Arch. Dis. Child. 2000; 83: 82-6.
18. Mehta NM, Nicholl RM. Positioning of long lines. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2002; 86: F68-9.
19. Webster NJ, Odd DE, Harding JE, Battin MR. Digital imaging and long lines. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. [eletter] Arch. Dis. Child. 2004; http://fn.bmjjournals.eom/cgi/eletters/89/1/F44.
20. Rastogi S, Bhutada A, Sahni R, Wung JT. Spontaneous correction of the malpositioned percutaneous central venous line in infants. Pediatr. Radiol. 1998; 28: 694-6.
21. Makwana N, Lander A, Buick R, Kumararatne B. Unusual complication of a central venous line in a neonate. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2003; 88: F440.
22. Chandran S, Chong E. Delayed presentation of a neonatal long line incident. J. Paediatr. Child. Health 2003; 39: 719.
23. Cartwright D. Letter. J. Paediatr. Child. Health 2004; 40: 332-3.
24. Nadroo AM, Glass RB, Lin J, Green RS, Holzman IR. Changes in upper extremity position cause migration of peripherally inserted central catheters in neonates. Pediatrics 2002; 110: 131-6.
25. Darling JC, Newell SJ, Dear PRF. Placement of neonatal central venous catheter tips in the right atrium: A practice to be avoided? Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2001; 85: F146.
26. Ohki Y, Tabata M, Kuwashima M, Takeuchi H, Nako Y, Morikawa A. Ultrasonographic detection of very thin percutaneous central venous catheter in neonates. Acta Paediatr. 2000; 89: 1381-4.
27. Madar RJ, Deshpande SA. Reappraisal of ultrasound imaging of neonatal intravascular catheters. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal. Ed. 1996; 75: F62-4.