Ultrasound-guided vs. Non-ultrasound-guided femoral artery puncture techniques: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis
Keywords:
Femoral artery puncture, Meta‑analysis, Ultrasound guidance, Body landmarksAbstract
Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of ultrasound‑guided (US) versus non‑US femoral artery puncture (FAP) methods, including fluoroscopy‑guided (FL) and non‑guided (NG) techniques.
Materials: This meta‑analysis included 11 randomized controlled trials and 1 non‑randomized retrospective study, comprising a total of 12 studies involving 5534 patients across diverse clinical settings. Studies varied in operator experience, institutional settings, and procedural protocols. Key outcomes assessed included complication rates, vessel access time, first‑pass success rates, number of attempts, and the risk of accidental venipuncture.
Results: Analysis of the heterogeneous dataset showed that guided techniques were associated with reduced complication rates compared to NG methods (pooled odds ratio (OR): 0.45, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.28–0.73). US guidance was associated with decreased vessel access time (mean difference: − 16.30 s, 95% CI − 29.83 to − 2.76), higher first‑pass success rates (pooled OR: 3.54, 95% CI 2.36 to 5.30), and required fewer attempts compared to nonUS techniques. US guidance also showed lower risk of inadvertent venipuncture (pooled OR: 0.22, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.34).
Conclusion: This meta‑analysis suggests potential benefits of US femoral artery puncture techniques over non‑US methods, while acknowledging significant heterogeneity across studies. The observed advantages in procedural outcomes varied across different clinical settings and operator experience levels. These findings provide setting for institutional decision‑making regarding the implementation of guided puncture methods, considering factors such as operator expertise, resource availability, and specific patient populations.
References
1. Noori VJ, Eldrup‑Jørgensen J (2018) A systematic review of vascular closure devices for femoral artery puncture sites. J Vasc Surg 68:887–889
2. Irani F, Kumar S, Colyer WR Jr (2009) Common femoral artery access techniques: a review. J Cardiovasc Med 10:517–522
3. Jayanti S, Juergens C, Makris A et al (2021) The learning curves for transradial and ultrasound‑guided arterial access: an analysis of the SURF trial. Heart Lung Circ 30:1329–1336
4. Stone P, Campbell J, Thompson S et al (2020) A prospective, randomized study comparing ultrasound versus fluoroscopic guided femoral arterial access in noncardiac vascular patients. J Vasc Surg 72:259–267
5. Flumignan RL, Trevisani VF, Lopes RD et al (2021) Ultrasound guidance for arterial (other than femoral) catheterisation in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:CD013585
6. Xenogiannis I, Varlamos C, Keeble TR et al (2023) Ultrasound‑guided femoral vascular access for percutaneous coronary and structural interventions. Diagnostics 13:2028
7. Sobolev M, Slovut DP, Lee Chang A et al (2015) Ultrasound‑guided catheterization of the femoral artery: a systematic review and meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Invasive Cardiol 27:318–323
8. Fanaroff AC, Giri J (2022) Fluoroscopic guidance for femoral artery accesspushing patients out of the plane without a parachute? JAMA Cardiol 7:1118–1120
9. Chinikar M, Ahmadi A, Heidarzadeh A et al (2014) Imaging or trusting on surface anatomy? A comparison between fluoroscopic guidance and anatomic landmarks for femoral artery access in diagnostic cardiac catheterization. A randomized control trial. Cardiovasc Interv Ther 29:18–23
10. Huggins CE, Gillespie MJ, Tan WA et al (2009) A prospective randomized clinical trial of the use of fluoroscopy in obtaining femoral arterial access. J Invasive Cardiol 21:105–109
11. Abu‑Fadel MS, Sparling JM, Zacharias SJ et al (2009) Fluoroscopy vs. traditional guided femoral arterial access and the use of closure devices: a randomized controlled trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 74:533–539
12. Wells GA, Wells G, Shea B, et al. (2014) The Newcastle‑Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta‑analyses.
13. Gedikoglu M, Oguzkurt L, Gur S et al (2013) Comparison of ultrasound guidance with the traditional palpation and fluoroscopy method for the common femoral artery puncture. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 82:1187–1192
14. Slattery MM, Goh GS, Power S et al (2015) Comparison of ultrasoundguided and fluoroscopy‑assisted antegrade common femoral artery puncture techniques. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 38:579–582
15. Seto AH, Abu‑Fadel MS, Sparling JM et al (2010) Real‑time ultrasound guidance facilitates femoral arterial access and reduces vascular complications: FAUST (Femoral Arterial Access With Ultrasound Trial). JACC Cardiovasc Interv 3:751–758
16. Marquis‑Gravel G, Tremblay‑Gravel M, Lévesque J et al (2018) Ultrasound guidance versus anatomical landmark approach for femoral artery access in coronary angiography: a randomized controlled trial and a metaanalysis. J Interv Cardiol 31:496–503
17. Dudeck O, Teichgraeber U, Podrabsky P et al (2004) A randomized trial assessing the value of ultrasound‑guided puncture of the femoral artery for interventional investigations. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 20:363–368
18. Koshy LM, Aberle LH, Krucoff MW et al (2018) Comparison of radial access, guided femoral access, and non‑guided femoral access among women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. J Invasive Cardiol 30:18–22
19. Tuna Katırcıbaşı M, Güneş H, Çağrı Aykan A et al (2018) Comparison of ultrasound guidance and conventional method for common femoral artery cannulation: a prospective study of 939 patients. Acta Cardiol Sin 34:394–398
20. Fukuda K, Okazaki S, Shiozaki M et al (2021) Ultrasound‑guided puncture reduces bleeding‑associated complications, regardless of calcified plaque, after endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal lesions, especially using the antegrade procedure: a single‑center study. PLoS ONE 16:e0248416
21. Isoda R, Morita I, Yoshida M (2020) Iatrogenic femoral vein pseudoaneurysm. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech 6:285–287
22. Owens JT, Bhatty S, Donovan RJ et al (2017) Usefulness of a nonsuture closure device in patients undergoing diagnostic coronary and peripheral angiography. Int J Angiol 26:228–233
23. Nguyen P, Makris A, Hennessy A et al (2019) Standard versus ultrasoundguided radial and femoral access in coronary angiography and intervention (SURF): a randomised controlled trial. EuroIntervention 15:e522–e530
24. Rashid MK, Sahami N, Singh K et al (2019) Ultrasound guidance in femoral artery catheterization: a systematic review and a meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Invasive Cardiol 31:E192–E198
25. Franco‑Sadud R, Schnobrich D, Mathews BK et al (2019) Recommendations on the use of ultrasound guidance for central and peripheral vascular access in adults: a position statement of the society of hospital medicine. J Hosp Med 14:E1–E22
26. Troianos CA, Hartman GS, Glas KE et al (2011) Guidelines for performing ultrasound guided vascular cannulation: recommendations of the American society of echocardiography and the society of cardiovascular anesthesiologists. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 24:1291–1318
27. Jolly SS, AlRashidi S, d’Entremont MA et al (2022) Routine ultrasonography guidance for femoral vascular access for cardiac procedures: the UNIVERSAL randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol 7:1110–1118
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yi‑Chen Huang, Yueh‑Hsun Lu, Wei‑Yi Ting (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Transfer of Copyright and Permission to Reproduce Parts of Published Papers.
Authors retain the copyright for their published work. No formal permission will be required to reproduce parts (tables or illustrations) of published papers, provided the source is quoted appropriately and reproduction has no commercial intent. Reproductions with commercial intent will require written permission and payment of royalties.
