Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Using ultrasonic Doppler to place arterial catheters in cats
By Haginoya, Satoshi et al.·Published in Journal of feline medicine and surgery·2024·Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Ultrasonic Doppler as a guide for feline peripheral arterial catheterization.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A study involving 26 cats needing sedation or anesthesia looked at two methods for placing a catheter in the artery of their hind legs. One method used an ultrasonic Doppler to help locate the artery, while the other relied on feeling for it by hand. The results showed that both methods had similar success rates and times for placing the catheter, with only a few minor complications like bruising. Ultimately, the ultrasonic method did not prove to be more effective than the traditional technique.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to determine if an ultrasonic Doppler-guided technique (UDGT) leads to improved placement efficacy (time, success) of feline dorsal pedal arterial catheters vs the traditional palpation-guided technique (TPT). METHODS: A total of 26 adult, client-owned cats requiring sedation or general anesthesia for any reason, aged >12 months and weighing >3.0 kg, and with Doppler blood pressure measurements of at least 80 mmHg were enrolled. Each hindlimb was randomly assigned for dorsal pedal arterial catheterization using either the UDGT or TPT. With the UDGT, the location of the artery was identified by an audible sound using the Doppler. Successful catheter placement was confirmed by visualization of an arterial pressure waveform using a transducer and monitor system attached to the catheter. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to compare the two techniques. RESULTS: The overall proportion of successful arterial catheterization was 17% (9/52): 19% (5/26) via UDGT and 15% (4/26) via TPT. Among successful arterial catheterizations (n = 9), the mean time to catheterization was 339 ± 198 s: 328 ± 237 s (n = 5) with UDGT and 353 ± 171 s (n = 4) with TPT. The log-rank test showed the two techniques were not significantly different in likelihood of successful arterial catheter placement or time to successful catheterization ( = 0.698). An arterial flash occurred in 62% (32/52) of the limbs, 58% (15/26) with the UDGT and 65% (17/26) with the TPT. Complications (self-limiting bruising, hematoma formation) were observed equally between UDGT (3/26 limbs) and TPT (3/26 limbs) in six cats. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The UDGT did not improve the efficacy of catheter placement compared with the TPT. Few complications were associated with arterial catheterization.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39212534/