- Case report
- Open access
- Published:
Ultrasound-guided radial vein cannulation for general anesthesia in cases with difficult peripheral venous access: a report of two cases
JA Clinical Reports volume 10, Article number: 58 (2024)
Abstract
Background
Despite advancements in ultrasonography, locating peripheral veins for catheter placement remains a challenge in patients with altered anatomy owing to multiple surgeries. Herein, we highlight the potential of using the radial vein as an alternative site for ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheterization.
Case presentation
We present two cases of patients with extensive surgical histories, including multiple abdominal surgeries, leading to difficult peripheral venous access. Traditional sites for peripheral venous catheterization were unsuitable due to vein narrowing or lack of visibility. In both cases, ultrasonography helped identify the radial vein as the only viable site for catheter placement. The patients underwent successful ultrasonography-guided catheterization of the radial vein without complications, facilitating medical management, including anesthesia induction and intraoperative monitoring.
Conclusions
The radial vein is a feasible and safe alternative for ultrasound-guided peripheral venous access in patients where traditional venous access sites are compromised.
Background
Difficult peripheral venous cannulation occurs in 10–24% of adult patients [1], for whom conventional or peripherally inserted central venous catheters are typically utilized. Recent advancements in ultrasound guidance have significantly enhanced the success rates of peripheral venous cannulation, particularly among patients with challenging peripheral venous access [2].
While attempting radial artery catheterization, the radial vein may occasionally be cannulated inadvertently. To date, no complications following such accidental cannulation have been reported. We document two cases where peripheral venous catheters were successfully placed into the radial veins under ultrasound guidance in patients with challenging peripheral venous access.
Case presentation
Case 1
A 70-year-old man (height, 168Â cm; body weight, 54Â kg) underwent total cystectomy with ileal conduit for bladder cancer and colostomy for pelvic abscess and small intestine perforation. Two years later, he developed a paralytic bowel obstruction requiring colostomy. A peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC; single lumen, 3 Fr.) was inserted in his right upper arm for total parenteral nutrition. On the day of the surgery, general anesthesia was induced via propofol administered from the PICC. An intraarterial pressure line was inserted into the left radial artery. Intraoperatively, the patient experienced a sudden blood loss of approximately 300Â mL within 30Â min owing to the surgical release of colon adhesions from previous surgeries; therefore, an additional venous catheter for potential transfusion was required. Despite the extensive ultrasonographic examinations, no peripheral veins were visible. The cubital veins, including median cubital, cephalic, and basilic veins, were either narrowed or not visible. However, the radial veins in the left forearm were accessible, and a long intravenous catheter (external diameter 20 G, catheter length, 51Â mm; Surfloâ„¢ I.V. Catheter, TERMO Co. Japan) was inserted under ultrasonographic guidance (Figs. 1 and 2). Successful hemostasis resulted in a final blood loss limited to 300Â mL, rendering intraoperative transfusion unnecessary.
Case 2
A 65-year-old man (height, 170Â cm; body weight, 88Â kg) with recurrent nerve palsy post-aortic replacement surgery for dissecting aortic aneurysm was scheduled for laryngoplasty. His medical history included psychostimulant-induced psychosis and hepatitis C virus infection. The patient was apprehensive about repeated attempts at peripheral venous cannulation for the induction of general anesthesia. During preoperative consultation, the anesthesiologist advised that central venous catheter placement might be necessary in case peripheral access was challenging. The patient opted against central venous catheter placement owing to discomfort experienced during prior surgeries. Consequently, the anesthesiologist agreed to pursue peripheral venous access.
On the day of surgery, despite the absence of visible superficial peripheral veins in the forearm, radial veins were detected in the right forearm. After injecting 1% lidocaine (0.5 mL) with a 25-G hypodermic needle, a long intravenous catheter (20 G, inserting length 51 mm, Surflo™ I.V. Catheter, TERMO Co. Japan) was subsequently placed in the radial vein under ultrasonographic guidance (Fig. 3). Propofol was administered through this catheter, and general anesthesia was induced. No complications were reported with perioperative catheter maintenance, and the patient expressed satisfaction during the postoperative visit.
Discussion
Antecubital cephalic or median veins are typically preferred for emergent peripheral venous access owing to their ease of access [3]. However, repeated venous access can cause narrowing or obstruction of these veins. Consequently, catheter placement in these veins is often unsuccessful in patients with difficult venous access. Systematic, stepwise approaches and a broad repertoire of techniques are essential for managing such cases [4]. Ultrasound guidance is instrumental in facilitating peripheral venous catheter placement in patients with difficult venous access [5]. The midline catheter has also gained attention as a safe and long-indwelling ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheter for patients with difficult venous access [6]. In Case 2, a midline catheter was a feasible alternative. However, its placement requires a sterilized environment, including using sterilized surgical gloves and drapes, and the arm of the patient must be abducted during the procedure, which complicates insertion during surgery under general anesthesia, as evidenced in Case 1.
Witting et al. reported higher success rates of cannulation for venous diameters > 4 mm than for < 4 mm and venous depths of 3–15 mm versus < 3 or > 15 mm [7]. In Case 1, the venous diameter was 1 mm, and the venous depth was 6 mm. In Case 2, the venous diameter was 2 mm, and the venous depth was 7 mm. While the diameters in these two cases were narrow, the depths were within the ranges for ultrasound puncture. If the needle is inserted shallower than 3 mm, ultrasound focusing is insufficient, and lateral resolution is poor, resulting in poor image quality. In addition, the needle should strike the center of the vein as soon as it is advanced subcutaneously. However, if the needle is deflected, the lateral wall of the vein will be damaged and cannulation will not be possible due to hemorrhage. Therefore, ultrasound-guided venous cannulation requires a needle to be inserted to a depth of at least 3 mm. In contrast, if the needle is inserted too deep, advancing the needle into the target vein becomes difficult. Concerning the optimal depth of the vein, no precise reference can be found because there are no other reports on cannulation of the radial vein.
Radial veins are a pair of veins that accompany the radial artery. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of targeting the radial vein for cannulation. Therefore, the optimal site or technique for radial vein cannulation is not conclusive. However, because the radial vein always accompanies the radial artery, the optimal conditions for cannulation of the radial artery to the radial vein are expected to be extrapolated. Wu et al. reported that the success rate of ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation was higher in the mid-forearm than in the wrist [8]. Yücel et al. also reported higher success rates in the distal quarter of the forearm than in the mid-forearm [9]. The radial nerve to the radial artery and veins in the proximal quarter are closely located. Therefore, the radial vein cannulation in this region carries a risk of nerve injury. In summary, the optimal cannulation site of the radial vein may be the distal quarter of the forearm, whereas the proximal from the mid-forearm and wrist are less likely to be suitable for cannulation. The most important technical aspect of cannulation would be the entry angle of the needle into the vein. If the entry angle is too steep, the posterior wall of the vein is easily damaged during the cannulation. In our experience, the best entry angle for cannulation is a shallow angle of less than 30°. As in ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation, the needle is gradually advanced into the target vein while confirming its position with ultrasound [10, 11]. Once the needle tip reaches the vein, further decreasing the entry angle is recommended to achieve cannulation. The shallower the needle entry angle, the greater the distance from the sticking site to the target vein. Therefore, we use relatively long needles (usually approximately 5 cm) for deeper veins such as the radial vein.
We demonstrated that the radial vein is a viable target for ultrasound-guided peripheral venous access in patients with difficult peripheral venous access and the cannulation can be performed safely with ultrasound guidance.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Abbreviations
- PICC:
-
Peripherally inserted central catheter
References
Sabri A, Szalas J, Holmes KS, Labib L, Mussivand T. Failed attempts and improvement strategies in peripheral intravenous catheterization. Biomed Mater Eng. 2013;23:93–108. https://doi.org/10.3233/BME-120735.
van Loon FHJ, Buise MP, Claassen JJF, Dierick-van Daele ATM, Bouwman ARA. Comparison of ultrasound guidance with palpation and direct visualisation for peripheral vein cannulation in adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2018;121:358–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2018.04.047.
Carr PJ, Rippey JC, Budgeon CA, Cooke ML, Higgins N, Rickard CM. Insertion of peripheral intravenous cannulae in the Emergency Department: factors associated with first-time insertion success. J Vasc Access. 2016;17:182–90. https://doi.org/10.5301/jva.5000487.
Ng M, Mark LKF, Fatimah L. Management of difficult intravenous access: a qualitative review. World J Emerg Med. 2022;13:467–78. https://doi.org/10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2022.104.
Egan G, Healy D, O’Neill H, Clarke-Moloney M, Grace PA, Walsh SR. Ultrasound guidance for difficult peripheral venous access: systematic review and meta-analysis. Emerg Med J. 2013;30:521–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2012-201652.
Adams DZ, Little A, Vinsant C, Khandelwal S. The midline catheter: a clinical review. J Emerg Med. 2016;51:252–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2016.05.029.
Witting MD, Schenkel SM, Lawner BJ, Euerle BD. Effects of vein width and depth on ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous success rates. J Emerg Med. 2010;39:70–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2009.01.003.
Wu XL, Wang JJ, Yuan DQ, Chen WT. Ultrasound-guided radial artery catheterization at different sites: a prospective and randomized study. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2022;26:415–21. https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202201_27865.
Yücel ED, Tekgul ZT, Okur O. The distal quarter of the forearm is the optimal insertion site for ultrasound-guided radial artery cannulation: a randomized controlled trial. J Vasc Access. 2024;25:538–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/11297298221126284.
Tokumine J, Higa T, Nitta K, Teruya K, Fuchigami T, Sugahara K. Ultrasound guidance facilitates arterial catheterization. Masui. 2009;58:488–92 (in Japanese).
Clemmesen L, Knudsen L, Sloth E, Bendtsen T. Dynamic needle tip positioning - ultrasound guidance for peripheral vascular access. A randomized, controlled and blinded study in phantoms performed by ultrasound novices. Ultraschall Med. 2012;33:E321-5. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1312824.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable
Funding
The authors received no financial support for this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
HM, YS, and JT helped write the original draft. HM, JT, and KM interpreted the data. JT and HM helped conceptualize the case report. TY assisted with the literature acquisition and data validation.
Authors’ information
All authors are members of the Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Written informed consent was obtained from the patients for the publication of this case report and accompanying images.
Competing interests
Joho Tokumine is a technical adviser at Cardinal Health Japan Co. and has participated in an ultrasound-guided technical training course held by the company. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Motoyama, H., Tokumine, J., Saito, Y. et al. Ultrasound-guided radial vein cannulation for general anesthesia in cases with difficult peripheral venous access: a report of two cases. JA Clin Rep 10, 58 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40981-024-00743-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40981-024-00743-y