Real‐time ultrasound guidance for central venous access: a reply

We thank Wood and Scurr for their comments [1] on the Association of Anaesthetists Safe Vascular Access Guidelines [2]. Ultrasound-guided central venous access remains the gold standard and has been shown to improve success rates and to reduce complications, but we agree that there are some circumstances where ultrasound may not be either available or appropriate. Despite how portable and commonly available ultrasound machines have become, we have highlighted situations such as resource-poor settings, surgical emphysema and emergencies, where landmark techniques for central venous access may still have to be used. Wood and Scurr identify a population of patients with hypovolaemic shock in the prehospital environment, in which peripheral and intraosseous access is inadequate or impossible, and in whom they have considerable experience and success in the landmark insertion of subclavian vein devices [3]. They highlight reasons why ultrasound guidance may not be possible in these patients and where it may even delay insertion. They recognise that the subclavian vein is extremely resistant to collapse, even in severe hypovolaemia and in an upright position, because of the connections between the tunica adventitia of the vein and surrounding structures. This is also the case for the medial part of the axillary vein, as it becomes the subclavian vein. In specific circumstances, and in expert hands, landmark access to the subclavian vein remains an important route of central venous access. However, we would like to highlight the potential for thoracic trauma (e.g. clavicle or first rib fractures) to disrupt the usual anatomical landmarks. In most cases, we would still advocate the use of ultrasound for axillary/subclavian vein insertion. When done medially and close to the clavicle, the vein is usually patent even in hypovolaemic patients and there is now a considerable evidence base that ultrasound-guided access improves success rates and reduces complication rates [4, 5].

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Anaesthesia
Published
2026-04-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.70228
Primary Topic
Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Real‐time ultrasound guidance for central venous access: a reply

Andrew J. Johnston, Matthew Simpson
Anaesthesia
Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
article

Real‐time ultrasound guidance for central venous access: a reply

Andrew J. Johnston, Matthew Simpson
article en

Abstract

We thank Wood and Scurr for their comments [1] on the Association of Anaesthetists Safe Vascular Access Guidelines [2]. Ultrasound-guided central venous access remains the gold standard and has been shown to improve success rates and to reduce complications, but we agree that there are some circumstances where ultrasound may not be either available or appropriate. Despite how portable and commonly available ultrasound machines have become, we have highlighted situations such as resource-poor settings, surgical emphysema and emergencies, where landmark techniques for central venous access may still have to be used. Wood and Scurr identify a population of patients with hypovolaemic shock in the prehospital environment, in which peripheral and intraosseous access is inadequate or impossible, and in whom they have considerable experience and success in the landmark insertion of subclavian vein devices [3]. They highlight reasons why ultrasound guidance may not be possible in these patients and where it may even delay insertion. They recognise that the subclavian vein is extremely resistant to collapse, even in severe hypovolaemia and in an upright position, because of the connections between the tunica adventitia of the vein and surrounding structures. This is also the case for the medial part of the axillary vein, as it becomes the subclavian vein. In specific circumstances, and in expert hands, landmark access to the subclavian vein remains an important route of central venous access. However, we would like to highlight the potential for thoracic trauma (e.g. clavicle or first rib fractures) to disrupt the usual anatomical landmarks. In most cases, we would still advocate the use of ultrasound for axillary/subclavian vein insertion. When done medially and close to the clavicle, the vein is usually patent even in hypovolaemic patients and there is now a considerable evidence base that ultrasound-guided access improves success rates and reduces complication rates [4, 5].

Anaesthesia
Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.