At the conclusion of the AAA rupture repair, output from the chest tube continued at a rate of 300 mL/h. A contrast venogram via the left basilic vein was performed showing extension of contrast from the left brachiocephalic vein into the pleural cavity (Figure 2). The thoracostomy tube, with its tip at the apex of the left lung, was pulled back several centimeters and a subsequent contrast venogram was performed resulting in a much smaller volume of extravasation into the left pleural cavity. The venogram was repeated twice at an interval of 30 minutes. There appeared to be a hematoma that had formed near the perforation site without continued extravasation of contrast, and there was minimal drainage of blood from the chest tube (Figure 3).
Previous experience in these cases with mechanical occlusion of right IJV catheters prompted the decision to place a line into the left IJV. A 13-French dialysis catheter provided not only adequate access for aggressive intraoperative volume resuscitation, but also a temporary access point for hemofiltration in the intensive care unit given the risk of postoperative renal failure.
In this case, it was difficult to explicitly define the mechanism of the vessel injury. US identification of the left IJV and insertion of the guidewire were uneventful. However, left-sided catheters pose a particular risk for dilator-related vascular injury. This is because the left IJV forms a nearly perpendicular angle with the brachiocephalic vein. There is a presumption that if the guidewire passes smoothly into the vein, it will successfully guide the dilator through the vessel.4 In this case, the guidewire likely passed the nearly perpendicular angle into the brachiocephalic vein. However, as the dilator was advanced along the guidewire, the guidewire may have become “trapped” against the inferior wall of the brachiocephalic vein. Under this hypothesis, perforation of the brachiocephalic vein and subsequent violation of the pleural space resulted. It should be noted that the mobility of the wire was not ensured at all points of the procedure given the emergent nature of this case. However, on removal of the guidewire from the distal port of the catheter, no exaggerated bend or any damage was seen.
As demonstrated by this case, successful aspiration of blood from all ports does not exclude malposition of a central venous catheter. In this case, the aspirated blood may have originated from the enlarging collection in the pleural cavity secondary to the vessel injury. Alternatively, an insufficient volume may have been aspirated and led to a false-positive conclusion with regard to correct catheter placement.
To avoid a complication whereupon the wall of a central vein may become compromised, a few simple maneuvers can be considered. First, the dilator should not be inserted beyond the approximate depth traversed by the introducer needle (18-gauge needle). Doing so increases the chance of vessel wall injury. Had there been a transesophageal echocardiogram in place, utilization of the bicaval view would provide confirmation of the guidewire in the superior vena cava and thus a good tract for the catheter to follow toward the cavoatrial junction.5 Similarly, given the prevalence of ultrasonography, direct visualization of the right atrium by way of a transthoracic echocardiogram is an effective and efficient method in confirming correct guidewire and central line placement. Studies have suggested that US visualization of bubbles (seen as opacification) in the right atrium after injection of 10 mL of agitated normal saline via the most distal catheter port confirms proper positioning of the catheter tip. Overall, when considering the thoracic vessels for cannulation, the right side should be given the higher preference, because there is an increased incidence of malposition when access is from the left.7
The literature on the management of central venous catheter malposition is mixed whether to reposition, replace, or remove as soon as it is deemed practical.6 In this case removal of the catheter had a few shortcomings. The bleeding may have been exaggerated because the patient was taking both warfarin and clopidogrel. It may have been worthwhile to administer fresh frozen plasma and platelets. Uncertainty as to the location of the body or tip of catheter meant the removal could have resulted in life-threatening arterial hemorrhage. The literature appears to be consistent in recommending that an inappropriately placed catheter should remain in situ until a workup can be completed, especially when direct external compression is not possible.7
The literature provides several suggestions on how to manage iatrogenic central vein injury when direct compression of an injured vessel cannot be provided. Saseedharan et al7 reported a hemodialysis catheter that penetrated the wall of the brachiocephalic vein entering the anterior mediastinum. Under fluoroscopic guidance, the misplaced catheter was removed in a staged manner with a balloon catheter in place to tamponade if a hemorrhage scenario resulted. Kuzniec et al8 reported a case of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in the management of a mediastinal venous perforation, allowing for direct compression of the perforation site. Iwańczuk et al9 reported on a right subclavian vein perforation with resulting hemothorax after subclavian vein cannulation with a hemodialysis catheter. Emergent thoracotomy allowed for reconstruction of the damaged vein wall. Finally, endovascular repair of central venous injury using an endoprosthesis has been reported,10 but this method involves the definitive implant of intravascular synthetic material that may have long-term obstructive implications. In addition, there is an inherent risk of worsening the injury in reaccessing the venous system that was already injured.
Fortunately, the ease of use and overall increased availability of the US device may positively impact first-attempt success rates for the placement of central venous catheters. US has been invaluable in targeting the site of entry, especially for the vessels located in the neck. When comparing landmark versus US guidance, many studies have shown a clear advantage of ultrasound guidance for the cannulation of the IJV. Troianos et al11 describes an improvement as an overall success rate from 96% to 100% with the use of US. More importantly, the first-attempt success rate improved from 54% to 73%, the number of needle advances decreased from 2.8 to 1.4 attempts, the time to cannulation decreased from 117 to 61 seconds, and the number of arterial punctures decreased from 8.43% to 1.39%. Probe placement on the thorax itself may help ensure both adequate guidewire and central catheter tip placement.11
Iatrogenic perforation of the brachiocephalic vein is a serious and potentially fatal complication that may occur after left IJV insertion of a large-bore catheter. It is important to understand that US guidance can facilitate the identification of vessels but cannot guarantee proper central line placement within a large vessel.
Management of a misplaced central depends on the extent of the injuries, general status of the patient, and efficiency of the clotting system. If only a needle puncture has occurred, the problem is usually not critical. However, if large-bore catheter penetration and fluid injection are involved, aggressive monitoring and consultation with a thoracic surgeon, vascular surgeon, and/or an interventional radiologist should be sought. The misplaced catheter should be left in situ until suitable imaging is obtained and a plan is devised to control any bleeding that might result at the time of removal.
Name: Lindsay R. Wetzel, MD.
Contribution: This author helped write and edit the manuscript, and with visualization.
Name: Priyesh R. Patel, MD.
Contribution: This author helped write and edit the manuscript, and with visualization.
Name: Nicholas L. Pesa, MD.
Contribution: This author helped conceive and design the case report.
This manuscript was handled by: Raymond C. Roy, MD.
1. Domino KB, Bowdle TA, Posner KL, Spitellie PH, Lee LA, Cheney FW. Injuries and liability related to central vascular catheters: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 2004;100:14111418.
2. McGee DC, Gould MK. Preventing complications of central venous catheterization. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:11231133.
3. Oropello JM, Leibowitz AB, Manasia A, Del Guidice R, Benjamin E. Dilator-associated complications of central vein catheter insertion: possible mechanisms of injury and suggestions for prevention. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 1996;10:634637.
4. Wong K, Marks BA, Qureshi A, Stemm JJ. Migration of a central venous catheter in a hemodialysis patient resulted in left atrial perforation and thrombus formation requiring open heart surgery. A A Case Rep. 2016;7:2123.
5. Gibson F, Bodenham A. Misplaced central venous catheters: applied anatomy and practical management. Br J Anaesth. 2013;110:333346.
6. Roldan CJ, Paniagua L. Central venous catheter intravascular malpositioning: causes, prevention, diagnosis, and correction. West J Emerg Med. 2015;16:658664.
7. Saseedharan S, Pandit R, Bhargava S. Left internal jugular vein dissection with anterior mediastinal placement following hemodialysis catheter insertion. J Pak Med Stud. 2012;2:134137.
8. Kuzniec S, Natal SR, Werebe Ede C, Wolosker N. Videothoracoscopic-guided management of a central vein perforation during hemodialysis catheter placement. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52:13541356.
9. Iwańczuk W, Guźniczak P, Kasperczak J. Hemothorax as a complication of subclavian vein cannulation with haemodialysis catheter—case report. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2013;45:8992.
10. Azizzadeh A, Pham MT, Estrera AL, Coogan SM, Safi HJ. Endovascular repair of an iatrogenic superior vena caval injury: a case report. J Vasc Surg. 2007;46:569571.
Copyright © 2017 International Anesthesia Research Society
11. Troianos CA, Hartman GS, Glas KE, et al. Councils on Intraoperative Echocardiography and Vascular Ultrasound of the American Society of Echocardiography; Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. Special articles: guidelines for performing ultrasound guided vascular cannulation: recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. Anesth Analg. 2012;114:4672.