Accidental placement of central venous catheter tip into internal mammary vein

The use of the internal mammary vein for central venous access

PURPOSE

To describe the use of the internal mammary vein as an alternative access for central venous catheters.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent placement of central venous catheters via the internal mammary vein. Patient demographics, indication for venous access, technical success, catheter type, dwell time and indication for exchange or removal were recorded.

RESULTS

Placement of central venous catheters via the internal mammary vein was attempted in 11 patients including 8 children (4 males, mean age 5.7 years) and 3 adults. The most common indication was parenteral nutrition in patients with intestinal failure (7/11). Initial needle access of the vein was successful in all patients. Catheter placement was successful in 9 and unsuccessful in 2 patients due to occlusion of the superior vena cava. There were no immediate complications. A total of 20 catheters of various sizes (3-14.5 French) and lengths (8-23 cm) were either placed (n = 12) or exchanged (n = 8). The most common indications for catheter exchange were poor function and malposition (7/8). Four catheters were removed for infection and 4 were accidentally removed. The mean dwell time was 141 days (range 0-963 days) per catheter for a total of 2829 catheter days. The total mean dwell time per patient, including primarily placed and exchanged catheters, was 314 days (range 5-963 days).

CONCLUSIONS

The internal mammary vein may provide a safe alternative route for patients who have lost their traditional access veins.

Accidental Central Venous Catheter Placement in the Internal Thoracic Vein: A Case Report

Central venous catheter (CVC) placement is an essential component of critical care medicine. CVC malposition is a known complication of internal jugular vein (IJV) cannulation. However, catheterization of the internal thoracic vein (ITV) is much rarer. Only a handful of case reports have been documented, and guidelines for management are therefore lacking. Our case study describes this rarely occurring ITV cannulation along with the discussion of risk factors, warning signs of malpositioning, and subsequent management plans to optimize patient safety. Previous studies have used fluoroscopy and agitated saline flush tests to confirm that agents administered through an ITV-located catheter would reach the right atrium. Considering this, it would follow that a catheter in this site could theoretically be used for medication administration, especially in emergency settings. This hypothesis remains the most novel part of our case study and might prompt further exploration of management strategies in this particular situation.

Central venous catheter use increases ischemic stroke risk: a nationwide population-based study

BACKGROUND

Central venous catheter (CVC) placement is a common procedure used for the treatment of critically ill patients. However, ischemic stroke is a complication after CVC placement.

AIM

This study investigated the association between CVC placement and ischemic stroke risk in an Asian population.

DESIGN

Population-based retrospective study.

METHODS

We enrolled 37 623 patients who ever-received CVC placement over 2000-10 and propensity score-matched individuals without CVC placement as the comparison cohort from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. We determined the cumulative incidence rates and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for ischemic stroke.

RESULTS

We finally identified and enrolled 34 164 propensity score-matched pairs of individuals. Compared with the comparison group, CVC placement increased the average annual ischemic stroke incidence [19.5 vs. 11.6 per 10 000 person-years; crude HR=1.28, 95%, confidence interval (CI)=1.21-1.35; adjusted subhazard ratio (aSHR)=1.4, 95% CI = 1.33-1.47; P<0.001). In addition, compared with those aged >35 years, stroke risk was significantly higher in <35-year-old patients with CVC placement (aSHR=14.3, 95% CI=6.11-33.4; P<0.001). After <1-year follow-up, the ischemic stroke incidence rate in the CVC placement group was ∼3.25-fold higher than that in the comparison group (aHR=3.25, 95% CI=2.9-3.63; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

CVC placement increases ischemic stroke risk, particularly in those aged ≤35 years; this trend warrants further investigation.