Document Detail


Safety and accuracy of bedside carbon dioxide cavography for insertion of inferior vena cava filters in the intensive care unit.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  11220716     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND: Bedside insertion of inferior vena caval filters (IVCFs) avoids risks associated with transporting these critically ill patients to the operating room or to the radiology suite. But because IVCF insertion requires preinsertion caval imaging, the risk of contrast-induced renal failure remains a concern. Carbon dioxide (CO2) as a contrast agent does not cause renal failure, but its accuracy in determining vena caval diameter (a critical factor in filter selection) and its safety in the critical care population are unknown. This study is designed to assess the safety of using CO2 as a contrast agent in this patient population and to evaluate its accuracy in determining the diameter of the inferior vena cava when used at the bedside. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study comparing CO2 with iodinated contrast (IC) material was performed in critically ill patients undergoing vena cavography before bedside IVCF placement. CO2 cavagrams were performed with one or more hand injections of 60 mL of CO2; a single injection of 40 mL of IC material was used. Digital subtraction techniques were used for all of the studies. Blood pressure, pulse rate, and arterial oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, and intracranial pressure (when available) were recorded before, during, and after contrast injection. Statistical analysis was performed using the paired t-test, with p < 0.05 being considered significant. Data are expressed as mean +/- SD. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were studied. Mean transverse inferior vena cava (IVC) diameters measured 20.4 +/- 0.7mm (IC) and 20.0 +/- 0.7mm (CO2); p = 0.003. The difference in the measurements was 0.4 +/- 0.1 mm, with the largest difference being 1.7mm. In the remaining 10 patients, CO2 differed from IC in determining IVC diameter by only 0.4mm, a statistically significant (p < 0.05) but clinically insignificant difference. No adverse effects on blood pressure, pulse, arterial oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO2, or intracranial pressure were noted with the use of CO2. CONCLUSIONS: Carbon dioxide as a contrast agent is safe and provides accurate determination of vena caval diameter and anatomy. Carbon dioxide should be considered the contrast agent of choice in critically ill patients.
Authors:
R F Sing; D J Stackhouse; D G Jacobs; B T Heniford
Related Documents :
6809996 - The dynamic response of the cardiopulmonary parameters to passive head-up tilt.
17343356 - Automated mouse euthanasia in an individually ventilated caging system: system developm...
6313906 - Respiratory and cardiovascular depressant effects of nabilone, n-methyllevonantradol an...
401436 - Cutaneous monitoring of systemic pco2 on patients in the respiratory intensive care uni...
3573186 - Urodynamic evaluation of ileal conduit function.
8124806 - Prevalence and predictors of audible physiological third heart sound in a population sa...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Evaluation Studies; Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of the American College of Surgeons     Volume:  192     ISSN:  1072-7515     ISO Abbreviation:  J. Am. Coll. Surg.     Publication Date:  2001 Feb 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2001-02-23     Completed Date:  2001-03-08     Revised Date:  2006-11-15    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  9431305     Medline TA:  J Am Coll Surg     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  168-71     Citation Subset:  AIM; IM    
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC, USA.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Angiography, Digital Subtraction
Carbon Dioxide / adverse effects,  diagnostic use*
Contrast Media* / adverse effects
Critical Illness*
Female
Humans
Intensive Care Units
Iopamidol / diagnostic use
Male
Middle Aged
Point-of-Care Systems*
Prospective Studies
Radiography, Interventional
Safety
Vena Cava Filters*
Vena Cava, Inferior / radiography*
Chemical
Reg. No./Substance:
0/Contrast Media; 124-38-9/Carbon Dioxide; 62883-00-5/Iopamidol
Comments/Corrections
Comment In:
J Am Coll Surg. 2001 Dec;193(6):714   [PMID:  11768691 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  A potentially expanded role for enoxaparin in preventing venous thromboembolism in high risk blunt t...
Next Document:  Continued (5-year) followup of a randomized clinical study comparing antireflux surgery and omeprazo...