Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
Type: Journal article
Title: A prospective clinical comparison of two intravenous polyurethane cannulae
Author: Russell, W.
Micik, S.
Gourd, S.
Mackay, H.
Wright, S.
Citation: Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, 1997; 25(1):42-47
Publisher: Australian Society of Anaesthetists
Issue Date: 1997
ISSN: 0310-057X
Statement of
W.J. Russell, S. Micik, S. Gourd, H. Mackay, S. Wright
Abstract: Tissue irritation, as evidenced by phlebitis, associated with Optiva™ (Johnson & Johnson Medical) and Insyte™ (Becton Dickinson) polyurethane cannulae was studied. The integrity of the cannulae on removal, the incidence of infection at the cannula site and the factors which influence phlebitis were also examined. One thousand and eight patients had a polyurethane cannula placed for induction of anaesthesia for cardiac surgery. After surgery, the cannula was examined every 24 hours. If evidence of phlebitis occurred, the cannula was removed and sent for culture. All remaining cannulae were removed at 72 hours and the site examined daily for a further three days. There were 503 Optiva™ and 505 Insyte™ cannulae studied. The distributions between the two cannulae with respect to patient characteristics, gauge of cannula, number of attempts and difficulty of insertion, cannula site and anaesthetist inserting were similar. The early removal rate for both groups was 47%. Overall phlebitis rate with Optiva™ was 31% and Insyte™ 33%. This difference is not statistically significant. The cumulative phlebitis rate increased with time but did not differ between the two types of cannulae. Minor tip distortion or shaft kinking of the cannulae occurred in 16.2% of Optiva™ and 23.5% of Insyte™. This difference is statistically significant and may relate to the slightly more acute taper at the Optiva™ cannula tip. Both cannulae were similar in clinical performance.
Keywords: equipment
polyurethane cannulae
anaesthetic techniques
intravenous cannulation
Description: Publisher's copy made available with the permission of the publisher © 1997 Australian Society of Anaesthetists "Because of a printer's error in the December 1996 issue of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care (Vol. 24, No. 6, p. 708, Figure 4) this paper is reprinted here in its entirety and in its correct form"--cf. p.42
DOI: 10.1177/0310057x9702500108
Published version:
Appears in Collections:Anaesthesia and Intensive Care publications
Aurora harvest

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Russell.pdf94.15 kBPublisher's PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.