Background Umbilical arterial catheter (UAC) insertion is a common procedure in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Correct placement of the tip of the UAC at first attempt minimises handling of the infant and reduces the risk of infection and complications. We aimed to determine the accuracy of 11 published formulae to guide UAC placement.
Methods This was a one-year prospective observational study in a tertiary NICU. Clinicians used their preferred formula for UAC insertion, with X-rays performed immediately post-procedure to check the tip position. Birth weight and measurements included in the 11 formulae were recorded within 48 hours. The gold standard insertion distance was defined as the distance from the abdominal wall to the mid-descending aorta, at T8 level on X-ray (range T6–T10). Insertion length using the 11 formulae was calculated and compared with this gold standard distance.
Results One hundred and three infants were included, with median (IQR) gestational age and weight of 28 (26–33.5) weeks and 980 (780–2045) g, respectively. The predicted value of the 11 formulae to place the UAC in correct position ranged from 51.0% to 73.8%. Formulae that involved direct body part measurements showed the highest predicted success rates, smallest mean difference from T8 and narrowest limits of agreement using the Bland-Altman method.
Conclusion Success rates for accurate UAC placement are highest when formulae that involve body measurements are used. However, even the most accurate method would result in more than 25% of UACs needing manipulation to achieve an optimal position.
- umbilical arterial catheter
- umbilical artery
- umbilical cord
- insertion length
- neonatal intensive care
- vascular access
- neonatal resuscitation
- neonatal procedure
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors WLL conceived and designed the study. She contributed to the literature search, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data and writing of the first draft of the manuscript. JAD contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data and revision of the manuscript drafts. PGD and CT contributed to the conception and design of the study, interpretation of data and revision of the manuscript draft. MT supervised all aspects of the study; she contributed to the acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data and revision of the manuscript draft.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval Approved by the Royal Women’s Hospital Research and Ethics Committee as a quality assurance project.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.