Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 13, 2025
08:12
Fully Endoscopic Mitral Valve Repair with Percutaneous Cannulation of Groin Vessels
Published on: May 26, 2023
1.8K
Modified Seldinger technique for neonatal epicutaneo-caval catheter insertion: A non-randomised retrospective study
Jack Jc Gibb1, Rachael MacLeod2, Liam Mahoney2
1Department of Paediatric Cardiology, Bristol Royal Hospital for Children, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
The Journal of Vascular Access
|November 11, 2021
Summary
The modified Seldinger technique (MST) offers a higher success rate for inserting Epicutaneo-Caval Catheters (ECCs) in neonates compared to the split needle technique (SNT). This method also reduces venipunctures with similar costs, improving neonatal care.
Area of Science:
- Neonatal Intensive Care
- Medical Device Insertion
- Clinical Effectiveness Research
Background:
- Epicutaneo-Caval Catheters (ECCs) are essential for neonatal care.
- No prior research has compared ECC insertion techniques for success rates.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the success rates and costs of the modified Seldinger technique (MST) versus the split needle technique (SNT) for ECC insertion.
- To analyze ECC insertion success in neonates born at ⩾35 weeks gestational age.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of routinely collected ECC insertion data.
- Comparison of MST and SNT insertion success rates and venipunctures.
- Sub-group analysis for neonates born at ⩾35 weeks gestational age.
Main Results:
- MST showed significantly higher first-pass (53% vs. 26%) and overall (72% vs. 40%) ECC insertion success rates.
- MST required fewer venipunctures per successful insertion (2.5 vs. 6.5).
- Similar costs per successful ECC insertion were observed (£156.41 for MST vs. £152.51 for SNT).
Conclusions:
- The modified Seldinger technique (MST) provides a higher likelihood of successful ECC insertion with fewer venipunctures.
- Costs per successful ECC insertion are comparable between MST and SNT.
- Further randomized studies are needed to confirm findings and assess other clinical outcomes like infection rates.
