4.6 Article

Neurologic manifestations of cerebral air embolism as a complication of central venous catheterization

Journal

CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Volume 28, Issue 5, Pages 1621-1625

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00003246-200005000-00061

Keywords

central venous catheterization; cerebral air embolism; embolism; complication; adverse effect

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective, Patients, and Methods: A severe case of cerebral air embolism after unintentional central Venous catheter disconnection was the impetus for a systematic literature review (1975-1998) of the clinical features of 26 patients (including our patient) with cerebral air embolism resulting from central venous catheter complications. Results: The jugular vein had been punctured in eight patients and the subclavian vein, in 12 patients. Embolism occurred in four patients during insertion, in 14 patients during unintentional disconnection, and in eight patients after removal and other procedures. The total mortality rate was 23%. Two types of neurologic manifestations may be distinguished: group A (n = 14) presented with encephalopathic features leading to a high mortality rate (36%); and group B (n = 12) presented with focal cerebral lesions resulting in hemiparesis or hemianopia affecting mostly the right hemisphere, with a mortality rate as high as 8%, In 75% of patients, an early computed tomography indicated air bubbles, proving cerebral air embolism. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy was performed in only three patients (12%). A cardiac defect, such as a patent foramen ovale was considered the route of right to left shunting in 6 of 15 patients (40%), More often, a pulmonary shunt was assumed (9 of 15 patients; 60%). For the remainder, data were not available. Conclusion: When caring for critically ill patients needing central venous catheterization, nursing staff and physicians should be aware of this potentially lethal complication.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available