Evidence Hub

Pneumothorax is a rare complication of thoracic central venous catheterization in community EDs

Vinson DR, Ballard DW, Hance LG, Stevenson MD, Clague VA, Rauchwerger AS, Reed ME, Mark DG et al.

The American journal of emergency medicine, 2015

316 participants

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The rate of iatrogenic pneumothorax associated with thoracic central venous catheterization in community emergency departments (EDs) is poorly described, although such information is vital to inform the procedure's risk/benefit analysis. We undertook this multicenter study to estimate the incidence of immediate catheter-related pneumothorax in community EDs and to determine associations with site of access, failed access, and positive pressure ventilation.

METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of 2 retrospective cohort studies of adults who underwent attempted thoracic central venous catheterization in 1 of 21 EDs. Pneumothorax was identified by postprocedural anteroposterior chest radiograph or emergent evacuation for presumed tension pneumothorax. Frequencies were compared using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS: Among 1249 patient encounters, the initial vein of catheterization was internal jugular in 1054 cases (84.4%) and subclavian in 195 cases (15.6%). Success at the initial internal jugular vein was more common than at the initial subclavian vein (95.4% vs 83.6%, P < .001). Periprocedural positive pressure ventilation was administered in 316 patients (25.3%). We identified 6 pneumothoraces (0.5%; 95% confidence interval, 0.2%-1.1%). The incidence of pneumothorax was higher with the subclavian vein than the internal jugular vein (2.3% vs 0.1%, P < .001), with failed access at the initial vein (2.5% vs 0.3%, P = .05), and among patients receiving positive…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 316 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free