<p>Background: The current standard followed for assessing central venous catheter (CVC) tip placement location is through radiological confirmation using chest X-ray (CXR). Placement of CVCs under electrocardiogram (ECG) guidance may save cost and time compared to CXR. Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the accurate placement of the CVC tip using anatomical landmark technique with ECG-guided technique. Another objective is to compare CVC placement time and postprocedural complications between the two techniques. Methods and Materials: A total of 144 adult individuals, who were critically ill and required CVC placement in the Emergency Department, were included for the study. Study duration was 6 months. Anatomical landmark and ECG-guided groups were assigned 72 participants each. Analyses were performed using t and Chi square-tests. Results: It was observed that 13 (18%) in the landmark technique were malpositioned as compared to none in the ECG-guided technique (P = 0.000). The landmark group had 22 (30.6%) participants with arrhythmias during the procedure, compared to none in the ECG-guided group (P = 0.000). The landmark group revealed that 30 (41.7%) of the CVC were overinserted and required immediate repositioning, compared to none in the ECG-guided group (P = 0.000). Conclusion: ECG-guided technique was found to be more accurate for CVC tip placement than the anatomical landmark technique. Furthermore, the ECG-guided technique was more time-effective and had less complications than the anatomical landmark technique. Hence, ECG-guided CVC placement is relatively accurate, efficient, and safe and can be considered as an alternative method to conventional radiography for confirmation of CVC tip placement. © 2018 Medknow Publications.All rights reserved.</p>
cited By 0
A. K. Krishnan, Menon, P., Kumar, K. P. Gireesh, Sreekrishnan, T. P., Garg, M., and Kumar, V. S., “Electrocardiogram-guided technique: An alternative method for confirming central venous catheter tip placement”, Journal of Emergencies, Trauma and Shock, vol. 11, pp. 276-281, 2018.