Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorKaracalar, Serap
dc.contributor.authorCeyhan, Meltem
dc.contributor.authorBayrak, Ilkay Koray
dc.contributor.authorYegin, Seda
dc.contributor.authorSarihasan, Binnur
dc.contributor.authorKeceligil, Hasan Tahsin
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T15:06:58Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T15:06:58Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.identifier.issn0265-0215
dc.identifier.issn1365-2346
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0b013e32831ac351
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/18741
dc.descriptionKECELIGIL, HASAN TAHSIN/0000-0002-8256-8059en_US
dc.descriptionWOS: 000264308600006en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 19244691en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground and objective The purpose of this study was to compare thrombosis rates in antegrade (catheter directed toward the hand) versus retrograde (catheter directed toward the elbow) cannulation of the radial artery. Our secondary objectives were to compare these two techniques in terms of success rate, differences in noninvasive versus invasive blood pressure measurement and complications. Methods After obtaining the approval of the local ethics committee and written informed consent the patients were randomly allocated to the antegrade (group A, n = 60) or retrograde (group R, n = 60) groups. Arterial thrombosis was evaluated by ultrasonography in each patient. Noninvasive and invasive blood pressure measurements and complications were recorded. Data were analysed using Student's t-test, the Mann-Whitney U-test, the categorical chi(2) test Fisher's exact test and Bland-Altman analysis. Results Thrombosis rates were similar between groups. The success rates for cannulation were 86.7 and 96.7% in the antegrade and retrograde groups, respectively (P<0.05). Complication rates were similar between groups. Very significant correlation was observed between the invasive and noninvasive methods when simultaneously measuring arterial systolic, diastolic and mean blood pressure. However, antegrade arterial measurements were consistently lower than those obtained via noninvasive methods. Conclusions We conclude that antegrade radial artery cannulation has no advantage over the retrograde approach in terms of reducing thrombosis, but it can be used in cases when the retrograde approach has failed. Eur J Anaesthesiol 26:207-212 (C) 2009 European Society of Anaesthesiology.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipOndokuz Mayis UniversityOndokuz Mayis Universityen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors thank Professor Yuksel Bek for statistical guidance. Financial support was given by Ondokuz Mayis University research fund.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkinsen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1097/EJA.0b013e32831ac351en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectantegrade cannulationen_US
dc.subjectcatheterizationen_US
dc.subjectradial arteryen_US
dc.titleFeasibility and safety of antegrade radial artery cannulationen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOMÜen_US
dc.identifier.volume26en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage207en_US
dc.identifier.endpage212en_US
dc.relation.journalEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster