Comparative evaluation between external jugular and internal jugular venous catheterization through landmark technique.

Background: Cannulation of a central vein is crucial in patients for hemodynamic management and when insertion of a peripheral line is not possible. The internal jugular vein is the preferred access site; however, in the case of not being accessible, the second cannulation site of choice is still unclear. The study aimed to access the feasibility of external jugular vein cannulation versus internal jugular vein cannulation in terms of success, cannulation time, number of attempts and complications.
Materials and Methods: In this prospective, randomised double-blinded study, 100 patients received 7Fr size triple-lumen central vein catheter either in the internal jugular vein (n = 50) or external jugular vein (n = 50) through the landmark technique as a part of anaesthetic care in the operation theatre. The number of attempts, cannulation time and incidence of complications in both the techniques were observed and recorded.
Results: The success rate in internal jugular vein cannulation was 88%, while in the external jugular vein, it was 78% (p = 0.17). The external jugular vein cannulation was comparatively quicker in our study (p = 0.01). Similarly, elevated body mass index did not affect the success rate in the number of cannulations attempts in either group (p = 0.08). In terms of complications, the internal jugular vein group had a total of 20% and the external jugular vein group had 28% complications; however, the complications were more severe in the internal jugular vein group.
Conclusion: Anaesthetists should rethink alternate routes for the insertion of central vein cannulation. The external jugular cannulation route is one of them.
Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.