Key result
Arm abduction to 90° is linked to a ~31% larger subclavian vein area versus neutral position.
Why the study?
Does placing the arm in 90° abduction improve ultrasound visualization of the subclavian vein in healthy volunteers compared to neutral position?
Observational (n=49)
Single-blind
Does placing the arm in 90° abduction improve ultrasound visualization of the subclavian vein in healthy volunteers compared to neutral position?
Absolute Event Rate: 162% vs 124%
p-value: p=0.001
Placing the arm in 90° abduction significantly increases the cross-sectional area of the subclavian vein, potentially offering a safer approach for ultrasound-guided catheterization.
May enlarge subclavian vein area with abduction in volunteers; hypothesis-generating for catheterization safety and requires patient validation.
We hypothesized that placing the arm in 90° abduction, through 90° flexion and 90° external rotation, could improve ultrasound visualization of the subclavian vein. In 49 healthy volunteers, a single operator performed a view of the subclavian vein in neutral position and abduction position. A second blinded operator measured the cross-sectional area of the subclavian vein. Abduction position increased the cross-sectional area of the subclavian vein from 124 ± 46 (mean ± SD) to 162 ± 58 mm (P = 0.001). An increase of the cross-sectional area of ≥50% was observed in 41% volunteers (95% confidence interval, 27%-56%, n = 20); this technique offers an alternative approach (maybe safer) for ultrasound-guided catheterization of the subclavian vein.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sadek et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Healthy volunteers (n=49). Arm in 90° abduction, 90° flexion, and 90° external rotation vs. Neutral arm position was evaluated on Cross-sectional area of the subclavian vein (p=0.001). Placing the arm in 90° abduction increased the cross-sectional area of the subclavian vein compared to neutral position (162 ± 58 vs 124 ± 46 mm; P=0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: