Key result
Doppler and venography-guided subclavian venous puncture achieved 100% success compared to 92% with fluoroscopic guidance, which also had the highest complication rate.
Why the study?
Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices are life-saving but can lead to puncture-related complications during implantation, requiring evaluation of different guidance techniques.
Does Doppler or venography guidance improve success and reduce complications compared to fluoroscopy for subclavian venous puncture in adults undergoing CIED implantation?
RCT (n=75)
Three equal groups
No
Does Doppler or venography guidance improve success and reduce complications compared to fluoroscopy for subclavian venous puncture in adults undergoing CIED implantation?
Doppler and venography-guided subclavian venous punctures are safer and more successful than fluoroscopy-guided punctures for CIED implantation.
Supports Doppler or venography guidance over fluoroscopy for subclavian access in CIED implantation; extends Level 2 RCT evidence for optimized techniques.
Background: Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) are life-saving devices, but may lead to puncture-related complications during implantation. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the success and complications of the subclavian venous puncture under the guidance of fluoroscopy, venography, and Doppler. Methods: This was a prospective observational study conducted for one year at a tertiary health center in North India. We studied the clinical profile, success, and complications in three puncture techniques for CIED lead implantation in 75 adult patients of >18 years of age, randomized in three equal groups of 25 participants. Results: The mean age was 66.6 ± 15.6 years, with the majority being males. The left-sided approach for lead implantation was common (84%). Pacemakers were most commonly implanted CIED devices. The overall success of punctures was 100% each in Doppler and venography group, and 92% in the fluoroscopic-guided venous puncture group. Success in the first attempt was observed in 48% in the Doppler group and 24% each in the fluoroscopic and venographic group. There were total of 12 complications, the most common were arterial puncture (10.7%), followed by major hematoma (4%), and pneumothorax (1.3%). The fluoroscopic group had maximum complications (83%), followed by the venography group. Significantly higher arterial punctures occurred in the fluoroscopic venous puncture group. Conclusion: There were 100% success in the Doppler and venographic groups and only 92% success in the fluoroscopic venous puncture group. Maximum complications were seen in the fluoroscopic group, with significantly higher arterial punctures seen in the fluoroscopic venous puncture group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kumar et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation (n=75). Doppler and venography-guided subclavian venous puncture vs. Fluoroscopic-guided venous puncture was evaluated on Overall success of punctures. Doppler and venography-guided subclavian venous puncture achieved 100% success compared to 92% with fluoroscopic guidance, which also had the highest complication rate.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: