A Randomized Trial of Ultrasound- versus. Fluoroscopy-Guided Subclavian Vein Catheterization in Children with Hematologic Disease

  • Huajin PangEmail author
  • Yong Chen
  • Xuehan Liu
  • Xiaofeng He
  • Weizhen Wang
  • Zhi Liu
Original Article



To compare the ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided subclavian vein catheterization in pediatric population with hematologic diseases.


A randomized prospective study of subclavian vein catheterization in pediatric population with hematologic diseases was performed. After randomization, the patients were assigned to either ultrasound- or fluoroscopy-guided subclavian vein catheterization. The primary outcome was number of attempts at venous cannulation. Secondary outcomes included: catheterization success rate, fluoroscopy time, operation time, and surgical complications.


There were 170 children enrolled between February 2017 and July 2018. There was no difference between the two groups with regard to the demographic data. Success within 3 attempts was achieved in 82 cases (82/87, 92.0%) in the ultrasound (US) group vs. 65 cases (65/83, 78.3%) in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.002). The average operation time was 10(7) min in US group vs. 10(6) min in fluoroscopy group (P = 0.722). There were 3 complications in the US group, while there were 6 complications in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.321). There were 4 catheter-related thrombosis (CRTs) found in the US group during follow-up, however there was no CRT in the fluoroscopy group (P = 0.121).


Ultrasound-guided venous puncture is a more accurate method of subclavian vein catheterization. However, the catheter tip can be placed more precisely by fluoroscopy. Thus, combined ultrasound-and fluoroscopy-guided technology is more efficient in subclavian vein catheterization of children with hematologic disease.


Children Fluoroscopy Hematologic disease Subclavian vein catheterization Ultrasound 


Authors’ Contribution

HP, YC: Study conception and design; HP, WW, ZL: Acquisition of data; XH, XL: Analysis and interpretation of data; HP: Drafting of manuscript and critical revision. HP is the guarantor for this paper.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest



  1. 1.
    Schummer W, Schummer C, Rose N, Niesen WD, Sakka SG. Mechanical complications and malpositions of central venous cannulations by experienced operators. A prospective study of 1794 catheterizations in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2007;33:1055–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brass P, Hellmich M, Kolodziej L, Schick G, Smith AF. Ultrasound guidance versus anatomical landmarks for subclavian or femoral vein catheterization. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(1):CD011447.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aminnejad R, Razavi SS, Mohajerani SA, Mahdavi SA. Subclavian vein cannulation success rate in neonates and children. Anesth Pain Med. 2015;5:e24156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Firat AC, Zeyneloglu P, Ozkan M, Pirat A. A randomized controlled comparison of the internal jugular vein and the subclavian vein as access sites for central venous catheterization in pediatric cardiac surgery. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016;17:e413–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruzoni M, Slater BJ, Wall J, St Peter SD, Dutta S. A prospective randomized trial of ultrasound- vs landmark-guided central venous access in the pediatric population. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:939–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nardi N, Wodey E, Laviolle B, et al. Effectiveness and complications of ultrasound-guided subclavian vein cannulation in children and neonates. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2016;35:209–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lausten-Thomsen U, Merchaoui Z, Dubois C, et al. Ultrasound-guided subclavian vein cannulation in low birth weight neonates. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2017;18:172–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Merchaoui Z, Lausten-Thomsen U, Pierre F, Ben Laiba M, Le Saché N, Tissieres P. Supraclavicular approach to ultrasound-guided brachiocephalic vein cannulation in children and neonates. Front Pediatr. 2017;5:211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brass P, Hellmich M, Kolodziej L, Schick G, Smith AF. Ultrasound guidance versus anatomical landmarks for internal jugular vein catheterization. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(1):CD006962.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pang H, Chen Y, He X, Zeng Q, Ye P. Fluoroscopy-guided subclavian vein catheterization in 203 children with hematologic disease. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97:e13527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hind D, Calvert N, McWilliams R, et al. Ultrasonic locating devices for central venous cannulation: meta-analysis. BMJ. 2003;327:361–0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ares G, Hunter CJ. Central venous access in children: indications, devices, and risks. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2017;29:340–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Diamanti A, Basso MS, Castro M, Calce A, Pietrobattista A, Gambarara M. Prevalence of life-threatening complications in pediatric patients affected by intestinal failure. Transplant Proc. 2007;39:1632–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Duran-Gehring PE, Guirgis FW, McKee KC, et al. The bubble study: ultrasound confirmation of central venous catheter placement. Am J Emerg Med. 2015;33:315–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ablordeppey EA, Drewry AM, Beyer AB, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of central venous catheter confirmation by bedside ultrasound versus chest radiography in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2017;45:715–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hourmozdi JJ, Markin A, Johnson B, Fleming PR, Miller JB. Routine chest radiography is not necessary after ultrasound-guided right internal jugular vein catheterization. Crit Care Med. 2016;44:e804–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cortellaro F, Mellace L, Paglia S, Costantino G, Sher S, Coen D. Contrast enhanced ultrasound vs chest x-ray to determine correct central venous catheter position. Am J Emerg Med. 2014;32:78–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smit JM, Raadsen R, Blans MJ, Petjak M, Van de Ven PM, Tuinman PR. Bedside ultrasound to detect central venous catheter misplacement and associated iatrogenic complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2018;22:65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dariushnia SR, Wallace MJ, Siddiqi NH, et al. Quality improvement guidelines for central venous access. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21:976–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lai P, McNeil SM, Gordon CL, Connolly BL. Effective doses in children: association with common complex imaging techniques used during interventional radiology procedures. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203:1336–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Royal HD. Effects of low level radiation-what's new? Semin Nucl Med. 2008;38:392–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr. K C Chaudhuri Foundation 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Interventional Radiology, Nanfang HospitalSouthern Medical UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Huazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina
  3. 3.Department of Medical Ultrasound, Nanfang HospitalSouthern Medical UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations