Background: Emergency physicians commonly perform ultrasound-assisted abdominal , using point of care ultrasound (POCUS) to identify and select a site for needle insertion. However, ultrasound-guided has the benefit of real-time needle visualization during the entire procedure. Our objective was to characterize the performance of emergency physician-performed ultrasound-guided using POCUS, their ability to achieve good in-plane needle visualization, and factors associated with procedural success. Methods: A POCUS database was retrospectively reviewed for examinations where abdominal was performed by an emergency physician at two academic urban emergency departments over a six-year period. Medical records were reviewed for demographics, presenting history, complications, and hospital course. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Results: 131 patients were included in the final analysis. The success rate for ultrasound-guided was 97.7% (84/86, 95% CI 92-100%) compared to 95.6% (43/45, 95% CI 85-99%) for ultrasound-assisted (p = .503). 58% (50/86) demonstrated good in-plane needle visualization; 17% (15/86) had partial or out-of-plane visualization; and 24% (21/86) did not demonstrate needle visibility on their saved POCUS images. All four procedural failures were performed by first- or second-year residents using a transducer, while all procedures using a linear transducer were successful. The most common complications were leak, infection at the site, and minor bleeding. Conclusions: Emergency physicians with training in real-time needle guidance with ultrasound were able to use POCUS to perform ultrasound-guided in the emergency department with a high success rate and no fatal complications. Based on our experience, we recommend performing ultrasound-guided using a linear transducer, with attention to identifying vessels near the procedure site and maintaining sterile technique.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wubben et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: