• Wenli Zhao, Huizhen Peng, Haiyun Li, Yinping Yi, Yufeng Ma, Yingkun He, Hongmei Zhang, and Tianxiao Li.
• Catheter Lab, Henan Provincial People's Hospital, Zhengzhou University People's Hospital, Henan University People's Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan 450003, China.
• Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Aug 1; 46: 1-9.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether ultrasound-guided techniques are superior compared to traditional palpation techniques in patients undergoing radial artery catheterization (RAC).MethodsElectronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The relative risks (RRs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to calculate the pooled effect estimates using the random effects model for categories and continuous data, respectively.ResultsA total of 19 RCTs comprising a total of 3220 individuals were selected for final analysis. The pooled RR suggested that ultrasound-guided techniques were associated with higher incidence of first attempt success than traditional palpation techniques (RR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.21-1.59; P < 0.001). Moreover, we noted that ultrasound-guided techniques were associated with fewer mean attempts to success (WMD, -0.80 s; 95% CI, -1.35 to -0.25; P = 0.004) and a shorter mean time to success (WMD, -41.18 s; 95% CI, -75.43 to -6.93; P = 0.018) than traditional palpation techniques. Furthermore, individuals using ultrasound-guided techniques had a reduced risk of hematoma (RR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22-0.72; P = 0.003).ConclusionsThis study indicated that ultrasound-guided techniques were superior compared to traditional palpation techniques for RAC in terms of efficacy and complications.Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.

17 keywords...

hide…