Evidence Hub

Pressure Monitoring-Augmented Long-Axis In-Plane Versus Long-Axis In-Plane Alone for Ultrasound-Guided Radial Artery Catheterization in Elderly Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Randomized Prospective Trial

Yanrong Lu, Zhengchang Yuan, Wenyan He, Xuesong Song, Shiyong Teng

Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 2025

54 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Radial artery catheterization is challenging in patients with poor vascular conditions, particularly those with severe atherosclerotic changes. The long-axis in-plane ultrasound technique provides full visualization and reduces the risk of posterior vessel wall injury; however, its precision is compromised by slice-thickness artifacts inherent to ultrasound beam physics. The authors hypothesized that combining pressure monitoring with ultrasound-guided long-axis in-plane catheterization would improve first-attempt success by mitigating ultrasound beam-thickness artifacts.

DESIGN

Single-center prospective randomized controlled study.

SETTING

Tertiary academic cardiac hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred eight elderly patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass grafting were enrolled, with 54 patients allocated to each study group. Nine junior anesthesiologists performed the procedures after standardized training.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups: pressure monitoring combined with ultrasound-guided long-axis in-plane catheterization (intervention group) and long-axis in-plane ultrasound-guided catheterization alone (control group).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate; secondary outcomes included procedural time, overall success rate, number of attempts, and complication rate. The intervention group showed a higher first-attempt success rate (74.07% [40 of 54] v 53.70% [29 of 54]; difference,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 54 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