z-logo
Premium
Extravasation Risk Using Ultrasound‐guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheters for Computed Tomography Contrast Administration
Author(s) -
Rupp Jordan D.,
Ferre Robinson M.,
Boyd Jeremy S.,
Dearing Elizabeth,
McNaughton Candace D.,
Liu Dandan,
Jarrell Kelli L.,
McWade Conor M.,
Self Wesley H.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
academic emergency medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.221
H-Index - 124
eISSN - 1553-2712
pISSN - 1069-6563
DOI - 10.1111/acem.13000
Subject(s) - medicine , extravasation , confidence interval , odds ratio , radiology , confounding , retrospective cohort study , contrast (vision) , logistic regression , surgery , pathology , artificial intelligence , computer science
Objective Ultrasound‐guided intravenous catheter ( USGIV ) insertion is increasingly being used for administration of intravenous ( IV ) contrast for computed tomography ( CT ) scans. The goal of this investigation was to evaluate the risk of contrast extravasation among patients receiving contrast through USGIV catheters. Methods A retrospective observational study of adult patients who underwent a contrast‐enhanced CT scan at a tertiary care emergency department during a recent 64‐month period was conducted. The unadjusted prevalence of contrast extravasation was compared between patients with an USGIV and those with a standard peripheral IV inserted without ultrasound. Then, a two‐stage sampling design was used to select a subset of the population for a multivariable logistic regression model evaluating USGIV s as a risk factor for extravasation while adjusting for potential confounders. Results In total, 40,143 patients underwent a contrasted CT scan, including 364 (0.9%) who had contrast administered through an USGIV . Unadjusted prevalence of extravasation was 3.6% for contrast administration through USGIV s and 0.3% for standard IV s (relative risk = 13.9, 95% confidence interval [ CI ] = 7.9 to 24.6). After potential confounders were adjusted for, CT contrast administered through USGIV s was associated with extravasation (adjusted odds ratio = 8.6, 95% CI = 4.6 to 16.2). No patients required surgical management for contrast extravasation; one patient in the standard IV group was admitted for observation due to extravasation. Conclusions Patients who received contrast for a CT scan through an USGIV had a higher risk of extravasation than those who received contrast through a standard peripheral IV . Clinicians should consider this extravasation risk when weighing the risks and benefits of a contrast‐enhanced CT scan in a patient with USGIV vascular access.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom