Dataset Information

Two cases of catheters inserted from the femoral vein straying into the hepatic vein, possibly owing to a Eustachian valve: a case report.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), a guidewire is inserted from the femoral vein (FV) into the right atrium. However, rarely, the guidewire or catheter strays into the hepatic vein (HV) because of the inferior vena cava (IVC)-HV angle. We report two cases in which a guidewire and venous cannula from the FV strayed into the HV, likely owing to a Eustachian valve.

Case presentation

Both patients were women who underwent transesophageal echocardiography-guided FV cannulation. In case 1, a guidewire from the FV strayed into the HV owing to a Eustachian valve. In case 2, ECMO was established postoperatively. Transthoracic echocardiography confirmed the venous cannula had strayed into the HV. Computed tomography indicated IVC-HC angles of 129° (case 1) and 102° (case 2).

Conclusion

A Eustachian valve can impede devices inserted from the FV and even allow them to stray into the HV.

SUBMITTER: Takise Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9307693 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Use of peripherally inserted central catheters has expanded rapidly, but the consequences for patients who eventually require hemodialysis are undefined.Our national, population-based analysis included 33,918 adult Medicare beneficiaries from the US Renal Data System who initiated hemodialysis with central venous catheters as their sole vascular access in 2010 and 2011. We used linked Medicare claims to identify peripherally inserted central catheter exposures and evaluate the associations of peripherally inserted central catheter placement with transition to working arteriovenous fistulas or grafts and patient survival using a Cox model with time-dependent variables.Among 33,918 individuals initiating hemodialysis with a catheter as sole access, 12.6% had received at least one peripherally inserted central catheter. Median follow-up was 404 days (interquartile range, 103-680 days). Among 6487 peripherally inserted central catheters placed, 3435 (53%) were placed within the 2 years before hemodialysis initiation, and 3052 (47%) were placed afterward. Multiple peripherally inserted central catheters were placed in 30% of patients exposed to peripherally inserted central catheters. Recipients of peripherally inserted central catheters were more likely to be women and have comorbid diagnoses and less likely to have received predialysis nephrology care. After adjustment for clinical and demographic factors, peripherally inserted central catheters placed before or after hemodialysis initiation were independently associated with lower likelihoods of transition to any working fistula or graft (hazard ratio for prehemodialysis peripherally inserted central catheter, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 0.91; hazard ratio for posthemodialysis peripherally inserted central catheter, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.73 to 0.89).Peripherally inserted central catheter placement was common and associated with adverse vascular access outcomes. Recognition of potential long-term adverse consequences of peripherally inserted central catheters is essential for clinicians caring for patients with CKD.