FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 332:1579-1581 June 8, 1995 Number 23 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited Related Article by Haire, W. D. Related Article by Mansfield, P. F. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: Mansfield et al. (Dec. 29 issue)¹ found that ultrasound-guided location of the subclavian vein was not beneficial, as compared with standard insertion procedures for subclavian-vein catheterization. The authors used ultrasound only to mark the site of insertion and did not study real-time ultrasound guidance of catheter placement. We believe that real-time ultrasound guidance might have been beneficial because of the favorable findings of another study² and the reported success with ultrasound guidance of internal jugular-vein catheterization.^3,4,5

A simple mark on the skin does not indicate the axis that will engage the vessel. The deeper the structure, the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Lavis, M, Vaghela, A, Tozer, C (2000). Adult intraosseous infusion in accident and emergency departments in the UK. Emerg. Med. J. 17: 29-32 [Abstract] [Full Text]