In this study, we showed that echocardiography is as reliable as TAR for determining UVC tip position, and can be suggested as an alternative.
Currently, the best site for UVC is IVC, between the hepatic vein drainage and entry into the RA. In this regard, our results revealed that 24.1% of the catheter tips in echocardiography were in an acceptable position (DV, IVC or IVC-RA junction). However, Harabor et al. (
16) showed that in 57% of 51 neonates, UVC was in acceptable position, in the supra-hepatic IVC up to RA entry while Ades et al. (
13) revealed that in 23% of 53 cases, the catheter tip was in the RA. These differences can be related to the different type and size of their samples, or the equipment and setting in different countries.
Moreover, our results revealed that radiography had acceptable sensitivity and specificity in determining the tip of UVC, except for the atrium, but echocardiography was almost more standard. These findings confirm our hypothesis, which is in line with the result of a comparative study that revealed a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 86%, 75%, 90%, and 67%, respectively based on the house staff physicians’ ability to discriminate malpositioned catheter from an ideally placed catheter in echocardiography (
11). However, Karber et al. (
1) and Harabor et al. (
16) did not report sensitivity or specificity of the diagnostic methods in their study.
In our study, catheters located in DV, IVC-RA junction, RA, LA in echocardiography were in TAR equaled to T9-T11, T6-T10, T5-T8, and T4-T6, respectively. Also, all catheters located below T12 were inside the liver or under the liver, and all those located at T4-T5 were in the arteries and heart. Therefore, the ideal position was the IVC-RA junction, which could be from T6 to T10, but its mean value was 8.6 ± 0.9 (T8-T9). However, the catheter tip position at acceptable positions (DV, IVC, and IVC-RA junction) can be between the T6 and T10 (
17). In this regard, Pulickal1 et al. (
11) showed that all catheters at T6 and other vertebrae above it were in the heart; 58% catheters were located in the LA. At T7, 82% of catheters were incorrectly positioned with the tip in RA. At T8-T9, 90% catheters were correctly positioned at the IVC-RA junction, 100% at T9. All catheters at T11 and other vertebrae under it were in the liver proximal to the DV (
11). TAR is a valid tool for a skilled person to determine the catheter tip with radiography based on diaphragmatic landmarks, vertebrae and chest anatomy, but in cases that the catheter tip is in the LA, TAR cannot detect it well. Therefore, echocardiography is more accurate than TAR. In addition, echocardiography is cheaper, lacks radiation, and more importantly, it can be simultaneously performed with a catheter insertion and quickly diagnose the complications. In TAR method, since the actual position of the catheter tip cannot be determined, radiography must be frequently taken (
12); thus, this method is time-consuming and costly. However, we should consider the shortcoming of echocardiography, such as the essential need of pediatric cardiologist to be available all the time, which is a difficult condition in most neonatal centers in the developing world, while TAR results could be evaluated by most neonatologists who are available at all time. This issue can be resolved by training a neonatal specialist in a hospital. Therefore, using echocardiography is preferred over radiography when a pediatric cardiologist or trained neonatologist is within reach.
In addition, our results indicated that the Dunn curve had poor specificity, sensitivity, PPV and NPV. Furthermore, a study conducted by Shukla et al. (
17) showed that the catheter tip was inserted based on the Dunn method, which was not accurate and caused over-insertion or low position in the liver. In addition, they stated that the length of the inserted catheter is more accurate based on BW and suggested the following formula 1 + (3 + BW + 9)/2. Then, in a study by Verheij et al. (
9), Shukla formula was revised due to excessive insertion of the catheter tip and proposed the (3 + BW + 9)/2 Formula. This formula reduced the over-insertion from 73% to 53%.
In our study, it seems that neither the Dunn nor any other formula is precise or accurate as much as monitoring the catheter tip at the time of the UVC insertion by the echocardiographist. Due to different anatomical position in the umbilical vein as well as the pathological conditions in respiratory diseases can alter structure and/or function of heart and the diaphragm (
18), however, a single formula cannot be determined.
5.1. Strengths and Limitations
In the present study, there were several limitations. Importantly, we cannot generalize our results to other populations. Therefore, it is suggested to evaluate these results in other parts of Iran. Another limitation was small sample size and the absence of Wright’s formula or other formulas in our evaluation beside Dunn method. Thus, it is recommended to conduct a larger trial in order to identify the possibility of replacing TAR assessment of UVC position via echocardiography as well as using another formula. Despite these limitations, we had a pediatric cardiologist available during the study period; thus, TAR and echocardiography have been performed in a close time interval. Moreover, this study can improve the diagnosis of catheter tip in infants by simultaneous use of the aforementioned methods, using the diagram as a landmark.