Vascular Access in Infants and Children

  • Hiroki NakamuraEmail author
  • Rieko Nakamura
  • Thambipillai Sri Paran
Reference work entry


There has been a significant increase in the survival rates of newborns and infants over the past decade, which is due in large part to advances in monitoring, vascular access, and other supportive measures. The use of new routes of access coupled with innovations in materials and catheter size has led to improvements in invasive monitoring, inotropic support, and the ability to provide total parental nutrition. Arterial cannulation is generally utilized for continuous blood pressure monitoring and frequent blood draws for laboratory studies. Sites of access in the newborn include the radial and pedal arteries as well as the umbilical arteries depending on size and age of the patient. Other sites are generally reserved for emergent situations. Common complications involve vasospasm or thromboembolic events, generally treated by simple removal of the catheter, with infection extremely rare. Venous cannulation remains the most common access method with central catheters placed for vasoactive medication infusion and parenteral nutrition. The umbilical vein can be utilized in the short term. The advent of the peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) now allows for bedside catheterization of infants as small as 500 g. Percutaneous and cut-down techniques are still utilized in neonates where a PICC line is unable to be obtained or definitive long-term central access is required. In emergency situations such as trauma, an intraosseous device can be placed in the proximal tibia or humerus to provide quick, short-term central venous access. As new materials and techniques continue to evolve, reliable vascular access will allow for the management of even the smallest and most critically ill neonates.


Venous access Arterial access Central catheter Neonatal critical care Umbilical catheter 


  1. Barrington KJ. Umbilical artery catheters in the newborn: effects of position of the catheter tip. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD000505.Google Scholar
  2. Brandao LR, Shah N, Shah PS. Low molecular weight heparin for prevention of central venous catheterization-related thrombosis in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(3):CD005982.Google Scholar
  3. Chiao FB, Resta-Flarer F, Lesser J, Ng J, Ganz A, Pino-Luey D, et al. Vein visualization: patient characteristic factors and efficacy of a new infrared vein finder technology. Br J Anaesth. 2013;110(6):966–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Church JT, Jarboe MD. Vascular access in the pediatric population. Surg Clin North Am. 2017;97(1):113–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Donaldson JS. Pediatric vascular access. Pediatr Radiol. 2006;36(5):386–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Farrelly C, Lal P, Trerotola SO, Nadolski GJ, Watts MM, Gorrian CM, et al. Correlation of peripheral vein tumour marker levels, internal iliac vein tumour marker levels and radical prostatectomy specimens in patients with prostate cancer and borderline high prostate-specific antigen: a pilot study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(5):724–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Guillon P, Makhloufi M, Baillie S, Roucoulet C, Dolimier E, Masquelier AM. Prospective evaluation of venous access difficulty and a near-infrared vein visualizer at four French haemophilia treatment centres. Haemophilia. 2015;21(1):21–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Johr M, Berger TM. Venous access in children: state of the art. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015;28(3):314–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Larson S, Mancini M, Raju R, Lee S, Windle M, Myers J. Vascular Access in Children. New York: WebMD LLC; 2016. Available from:
  10. Lyon SM, Given M, Marshall NL. Interventional radiology in the provision and maintenance of long-term central venous access. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2008;52(1):10–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Scott-Warren V, Morley R. Paediatric vascular access. BJA Education. 2015;15:199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Shenoy S, Karunakar BP. Factors influencing the peripheral venous catheter survival in critically ill children in a pediatric intensive care unit. Indian J Pediatr. 2014;81(12):1293–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sri Paran T, Corbally M, Fitzgerald RI. New technique for fixation of Broviac catheters. J Pediatr Surg. 2003;38(1):51–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Triffterer L, Marhofer P, Willschke H, Machata AM, Reichel G, Benkoe T, et al. Ultrasound-guided cannulation of the great saphenous vein at the ankle in infants. Br J Anaesth. 2012;108(2):290–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ullman AJ, Marsh N, Mihala G, Cooke M, Rickard CM. Complications of central venous access devices: a systematic review. Pediatrics. 2015;136(5):e1331–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. van de Wetering MD, van Woensel JB, Lawrie TA. Prophylactic antibiotics for preventing Gram positive infections associated with long-term central venous catheters in oncology patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;11:CD003295.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroki Nakamura
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Rieko Nakamura
    • 3
  • Thambipillai Sri Paran
    • 5
    • 4
  1. 1.National Children’s Research CentreOur Lady’s Children’s HospitalDublinIreland
  2. 2.Department Pediatric General and Urogenital SurgeryJuntendo University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of AnesthesiologyNihon University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Trinity CollegeDublinIreland
  5. 5.Paediatric SurgeryOur Lady’s Children’s Hospital, CrumlinDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations