Skip to main content
Erschienen in: The Ultrasound Journal 1/2018

Open Access 01.12.2018 | Original article

An easier and safe affair, pleural drainage with ultrasound in critical patient: a technical note

verfasst von: Luigi Vetrugno, Giovanni Maria Guadagnin, Daniele Orso, Enrico Boero, Elena Bignami, Tiziana Bove

Erschienen in: The Ultrasound Journal | Ausgabe 1/2018

Abstract

Thoracic ultrasound is a powerful diagnostic imaging technique for pleural space disorders. In addition to visualising pleural effusion, thoracic ultrasound also helps clinicians to identify the best puncture site and to guide the drainage insertion procedure. Thoracic ultrasound is essential during these invasive manoeuvres to increase safety and decrease potential life-threatening complications. This paper provides a technical description of pigtail-type drainage insertion using thoracic ultrasound, paying particular attention to indications, contraindications, ultrasound guidance, preparation/equipment, procedure and complications.
Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s13089-018-0098-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Abkürzungen
TUS
thoracic ultrasound
PLEFF
pleural effusion
ICU
intensive care unit
CT
computed tomography
US
ultrasound
PEEP
positive end-expiratory pressure
PRF
pulse repetition frequency
MHz
megahertz
RPE
re-expansion pulmonary edema

Background

Percutaneous pleural drainage is the third most commonly performed procedure in the intensive care unit (ICU) after vascular catheterisation and tracheal intubation [13]. Forty-one percent of patients admitted to the ICU have pleural effusion at the time of admission, while 21% will develop it during hospitalisation [4]. The gold standard technique for pleural effusion (PLEFF) diagnosis is computed tomography (CT), which requires transporting critical patients outside the ICU [5]. Thoracic ultrasound (TUS) allows a bedside approach for PLEFF diagnosis with a sensitivity of 92%, a specificity of 93% and a diagnostic accuracy of 93% [6], thus showing better reliability and accuracy than chest X-ray, without using ionising radiation. The use of bedside ultrasound (US) not only leads to an improvement in the diagnosis [7], but also allows the detection of the best puncture site and the fluid quantification of PLEFF [8, 9]. The positioning of percutaneous pleural drainage with TUS guidance increases the procedure’s success rate and safety [10]. International guidelines recommend ultrasound guidance for pleural drainage procedures and the usage of small-bore catheters [11]. Our technical note describes the pigtail insertion using ultrasound, paying particular attention to indications, contraindications, preparation/equipment, ultrasound guidance, procedure and complications.

Indications

Pleural effusions drainage theoretically improves oxygenation by enhancing the ventilation–perfusion ratio and by reducing arteriovenous shunt, re-expanding areas of a collapsed, poorly ventilated lung [4]. Consequently, drainage of PLEFF seems to accelerate the weaning process from mechanical ventilation [4]. Respiratory mechanics could significantly improve after effusion drainage because it leads to an increase in end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure, respiratory system compliance, end-expiratory lung volume and a decrease in plateau pressure [12]. Pleural drainage also provides a chance to obtain chemical-physical-cytological samples to guide the differential diagnosis of PLEFF and any follow-up therapy. Indications [11, 13] and relative contraindications [14] are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Indications and contraindications to pleural drainage positioning
Indications
Contraindications (relative)
Recurrent malignant pleural effusion
Symptomatic patients caused by the effusions
Massive transudative or exsudative pleural effusion
Parapneumonic effusions
Weaning from mechanical ventilation
Coagulopathy, thrombocytopenia
Small to medium size pleural effusions in cardiac patients with more than moderate left ventricular dysfunction
Pulmonary bullae
Pulmonary, pleural or thoracic adhesions
Loculated pleural effusion or empyema
Recurrent pleural infections
Skin infection over the chest tube insertion site

Preparation and equipment

The position of the patients is dependent on the operator preference [11]. To increase safety margin (depth of pleural effusion) [15, 16], whenever possible, place the patient in supine position with trunk elevation of 40–45° (in this position effusion gravitates down to the lower part of the chest pushing up the lung) and with arm elevated behind the head. However, as critically ill patients may often have limited mobility and also upright sitting position can generate haemodynamic side-effects (i.e., requirements of vasopressors) in a short time, the procedure will be described in a supine rather than a seated position. Considering that, some patients are limited ability to elevate the arm above the shoulder; it can be fixed in a soft bandage to the other side of the bed in a direction to the opposite shoulder.
Never rotate patient to the opposite site to create room for the procedure, as the fluid moves towards the paravertebral zone. The puncture might be more dangerous and patient could then lie on the insertion site which relates to infection complications. In patients with mechanical ventilation, do not take down PEEP or disconnect patient during drainage insertion because those manoeuvers can be associated with severe alveolar de-recruitment, especially in a patient that required high mean airway pressure and high PEEP to expand a poor compliance lung. On the other hand, the possibility of sudden reduction of intrapleural pressure due to puncture with risk of puncture of the visceral pleura is unlikely, especially in the case of ultrasound-guided puncture. Pigtail insertion is a sterile procedure; consequently, the operator should wear sterile gloves and use sterile drapes, sterilised materials on a sterilised puncture site. The necessary materials are listed in Table 2 and shown in Fig. 1. About pain management, pleura could be the most painful portion of the procedure, as it is highly innervated. For patients who are intubated you have the benefits of general anesthesia. For awake patient, pleural drainage insertion can be performed in a pain free manner if local anesthesia is performed properly, especially just above the upper rib edge.
Table 2
Percutaneous pigtail drainage insertion equipment
For the operator
Over the tray
Patient
Medical hat
Sterile drapes
Disinfection of puncture site
Medical mask
Sterile towels
Sterile drapes
Hand disinfection
Syringes (5–10 mL)
Informed consent (when possible)
Sterile gown
Local anaesthetics
 
Sterile gloves
Sterile water
 
 
Phased array probe or convex and linear probe
Sterile US probe cover
 
 
Introducer needle
 
 
Guidewire
 
 
Scalpel and dilator
 
 
Catheters (8–14F)
 
 
Trocar
 
 
Suture and medical dressing
 
US ultrasound, F French (1F = 0.33 mm)

Ultrasound guidance

Identification of puncture site

Pigtail insertion should be carried out in the safety triangle, almost always at the posterior axillary line if aiming for effusion [11], and performed under image guidance [11, 17]. The safety triangle is bordered by the lateral edge of the pectoralis major, the lateral edge of the latissimus dorsi and a line along the fifth intercostal space at the level of the nipple. However, ultrasound guidance allows the operator to better decide where to insert the pigtail. The best puncture site is, in fact, the place where the operator can visualise each anatomical structure (i.e., diaphragm, pleural, and organs) and where the operator can measure the maximum distance between visceral and parietal pleural (increasing the safety margin). One of the most commonly used US method for estimation of pleural effusion volume (V) is represented by the Balik equation: V (mL) = 20 × Sep (mm) [8]. To obtain separation (Sep), the operator has to measure the maximal vertical distance between the parietal and visceral pleura in end-expiration at the lung base, in supine patient with trunk elevation of 10–15°. The patient’s position greatly influences the extent of PLEFF [18]. In addition, for pleural effusion when measuring the maximal end-expiratory distance between the parietal and visceral pleura at the thoracic base the area under the curve, as reported by Vignon et al. [19], was greater for right-sided pleural effusions, on the left side the heart increases the fluid level, like a stone in a water recipient. The operator should also examine the ultrasound features of the effusion; the presence of hyperechoic material within the effusion indicates an exsudative effusion.

Intercostal artery visualisation

It was once thought that ultrasound was incapable of identifying intercostal vessels [10]. However, some studies have shown that Doppler ultrasound can be used to visualise intercostal vessels [2023] helping prevent vessel injury and ensure a procedure with a low risk of bleeding, even in patients with abnormal pre-procedural coagulation parameters [24]. The colour Doppler box should be placed on the bottom edge of the rib and the depth reduced so the rib does not occupy the entire screen. Reduce the pulse repetition frequency (PRF) until pulsation is detected (Fig. 2, Additional file 1: Video S1). Take care the more posteriorly puncture site is performed, the greater the risk of puncture of the intercostal artery which is not covered by the lower rib edge approaching to the paravertebral line [2528].

Site marking or direct needle guidance

Ultrasound guidance during pigtail insertion is performed using either site marking or direct needle guidance [29]. In the first case, the physician defines the optimal location point and marks it on the skin, then carries out the procedure without using real-time visualisation through US. Remember that patient repositioning can lead to fluid reallocation, so drain insertion has to be performed instantly after “site marking”. In “direct needle guidance” ultrasound is used in real-time to guide the pleural puncture; some operators prefer to perform needle insertion under real-time ultrasound guidance even though this approach is more technically challenging [29]. Advantages and limitations of ultrasound guidance are enlisted in Table 3.
Table 3
Advantages and limitations of ultrasound guidance
Advantage
Limitations
Can be performed in any position
Thickness of ribcage and soft tissues (i.e., obese patients)
Identification of the best site of puncture and best safety margin
Subcutaneous emphysema or large thoracic dressings

The procedure

The following steps may also be performed with a single phased array probe, according to the local transducers availability. In the case of a single transducer the point IV will be performed without changing the probe.
A.
Identify the best site for the puncture. Use a low-frequency (3.5–5 MHz) ultrasound transducer (convex or phased array probe) to identify the best puncture site evaluating these following steps. The probe should be used in the transverse position between two ribs (Fig. 3, Additional file 2: Video S2):
I.
Diaphragm. The position of the diaphragm should always be marked at end-expiration when it is the most cranial in position;
 
II.
Organs. Subdiaphragmatic (liver, spleen, kidneys) and over-diaphragmatic (visceral and parietal pleura, heart, lungs);
 
III.
Maximum distance between visceral and parietal pleura. This increases the safety margin;
 
IV.
Shift to the high-frequency (7–15 MHz) ultrasound transducer (linear probe). The probe should be used in the transverse position between two ribs to identify the upper and lower borders of the needle insertion area. The puncture site and the needle trajectory must be carefully designed (Fig. 3), with particular attention to the depth required to reach the pleural fluid and avoid lung injuries. In morbidly obese with limited rib palpation, linear probe can also be used to help to be perpendicular and over the upper rib edge with great safety.
 
V.
Intercostal artery.
 
 
B.
Ultrasound-guided puncture. To minimize the risk of neurovascular bundle injury the needle must aim to the upper rib margin perpendicular to pleura, with the transducer to follow the needle trajectory under direct needle guidance (Fig. 4). The needle must be advanced slowly under direct visualisation. Aspiration of fluid with a syringe confirms the correct position using the site marking technique. For direct needle guidance, the correct position of the needle tip is visualised in real-time and constantly monitored (Fig. 4).
 
C.
Guidewire insertion and guidewire position check. Remove the syringe from the needle and pass the guidewire through the needle. Then remove the needle, leaving the guidewire in place (Fig. 5). It is mandatory to define the final position of the guidewire using US prior to proceeding with dilation (Fig. 5, Additional file 3: Video S3). It can be visualised as a hyperechoic linear structure from the insertion point at the skin surface to the hypoechoic effusion. Vertical rotation of the probe over the intercostal space allows for visualisation of the guidewire (leading towards the costophrenic space). Check that the guidewire is moving freely in and out of the dilator throughout this process to avoid kinking the guidewire.
 
D.
Dilation. Make a small incision adjacent to the guidewire with the scalpel, then pass the dilator through the guidewire into the pleural space (Fig. 6). The dilator should not be introduced further than 1 cm beyond the depth from skin to parietal pleura; excessive dilator insertion increases the risk of visceral injury [24]; this depth can be safely taken with ultrasound.
 
E.
Pigtail insertion. The pigtail is passed over the guidewire, making sure that the last side hole is within the pleural space. Remove the guidewire, leaving the pigtail catheter in place (Fig. 7). After the guidewire has been removed, the drain is connected to the drainage system. Suture the pigtail to the chest wall in a manner similar to conventional chest tubes.
 
F.
Ultrasound confirmation. At the end of the procedure, it is mandatory to perform a complete bilateral lung ultrasound scan to exclude possible complications (e.g., pneumothorax) and confirm the pigtail position.
 
A step-by-step guide for pigtail insertion effusion is provided in Additional file 4: Video S4. It includes ultrasound guidance, insertion of the introducer needle to ultrasound confirmation of the pigtail catheter within PLEFF.

Complications and side-effects

The pigtail catheter is a smaller drain (8–14F) compared to traditional chest tubes. Pigtail catheters insertion includes the following complications:
  • Pneumothorax;
  • Dry tap;
  • Subdiaphragmatic insertion (injury to the diaphragm, liver or spleen with significant haemorrhage);
  • Laceration of adjacent structures (pleural or cardiac laceration);
  • Intercostal artery laceration;
  • Catheter malposition;
  • Catheter dislodgement or kinking;
  • Catheter blockage;
  • Wound infection and empyema;
  • Re-expansion pulmonary edema.
Insertional complications, dry taps and procedure failure are less common with ultrasound guidance [11].
The main complications linked to small-bore catheters are blockade, dislodgement, malposition, and kinking [30]. The disconnection of the tubing system represents another possible complication. For infected pleural-fluid effusions, the efficacy and safety of intrapleural fibrinolytic agents are still debatable [11, 31].
Wound infection and empyema may occur if the chest tube (a foreign object) introduces bacteria into the pleural space.
The etiopathogenesis of the re-expansion oedema (RPO) is relatively unknown. Over the years different hypotheses have arisen about increased permeability of pulmonary blood vessels damaged by fast re-expansion of lung tissue [32], blood vessels damaging by free oxygen radicals generated by reperfusion of ischemic lung [33], pulmonary hydrostatic pressure caused by increased venous return, pressure-induced disruption of the alveolar capillaries and altered lymphatic clearance [34]. Mokotedi postulated that RPO could be due to decreased pleural and intrathoracic pressure and left ventricular afterload increased after pleural drainage with a detrimental effect on LV performance in patient with more than moderate compromised LV systolic function [35]. Rapid lung re-expansion in the following settings [36] has been described as a risk factor:
  • Young patients 20–39 aa [37]
  • Large pneumothorax
  • Large volume pleural drainage (> 3 L) or high negative pressure suction (more than − 20 cm H2O) [38]
  • Lung collapsed for over 7 days.
Due to the fact that the etiology of re-expansion pulmonary oedema is unclear, there is concern that re-expansion pulmonary oedema may occur if larger volumes of fluid are withdrawn. Despite BTS guidelines, consensus statement of American College of Chest Physicians and most authors advise to drain no more than 1–1.5 L of fluid at one time, the amount of fluid safely removed continues to be debated as in several studies volumes greater than 1.5 L up to 6 L were safely aspirated.
Cause the RPO mortality rate has been quoted as high as 20%, preventive strategies include limiting drainage of pleural fluid, if the patient reports chest pressure or discomfort during thoracentesis, and using low negative pressure (less than − 20 cm H2O) for suction with serial measures of pleural pressure can lead to prevention and early recognition of complication. Pleural manometry is not currently in clinical practice and there are no randomised controlled trials. Two important warning signs to end the aspiration are if the patient develops a cough or complains of chest discomfort [11].
Remember that pigtails can easily be drawn back, but cannot be inserted farther in after the procedure is completed.

Conclusions

Placement of a pigtail catheter is a therapeutic manoeuvre in the presence of a pleural effusion that may noticeably improve gas exchange and respiratory mechanisms (i.e., respiratory system compliance, increase of functional residual capacity). Ultrasound guidance allows the operator to increase the rate of success of the procedure and reduce its associated risks. Consequently, usage of the ultrasound guidance during pleural drainage has become mandatory. Training programs, using appropriate manikins [39], must be encouraged to teach residents and clinicians how to use US during a pleural procedure.

Authors’ contributions

LV and GMG planned the study and drafted the manuscript. LV, GMG, DO and EB collected images and video clips, helped develop the bibliography, and drafted the manuscript. EB and TB helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our colleague Lolita Fasoli who provided valuable insight and language expertise that greatly assisted the drafting of our manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Availability of data and materials

Original data files are available upon request.
Informed consent for publication of completely anonymous data were obtained from the patients at the hospital admission.
No ethical approval was needed for a technical note.

Funding

No funds were received for the manuscript’s preparation.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Azoulay E (2003) Pleural effusions in the intensive care unit. Curr Opin Pulm Med 9(4):291–297CrossRefPubMed Azoulay E (2003) Pleural effusions in the intensive care unit. Curr Opin Pulm Med 9(4):291–297CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Fartoukh M, Azoulay E, Galliot R et al (2002) Clinically documented pleural effusions in medical ICU patients: how useful is routine thoracentesis? Chest 121(1):178–184CrossRefPubMed Fartoukh M, Azoulay E, Galliot R et al (2002) Clinically documented pleural effusions in medical ICU patients: how useful is routine thoracentesis? Chest 121(1):178–184CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Mattison LE, Coppage L, Alderman DF et al (1997) Pleural effusions in the medical ICU: prevalence, causes, and clinical implications. Chest 111(4):1018–1023CrossRefPubMed Mattison LE, Coppage L, Alderman DF et al (1997) Pleural effusions in the medical ICU: prevalence, causes, and clinical implications. Chest 111(4):1018–1023CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Goligher EC, Leis JA, Fowler RA et al (2011) Utility and safety of draining pleural effusions in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care 15:R46CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Goligher EC, Leis JA, Fowler RA et al (2011) Utility and safety of draining pleural effusions in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care 15:R46CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Lichtenstein D, Goldstein I, Mourgeon E et al (2004) Comparative diagnostic performances of auscultation, chest radiography, and lung ultrasonography in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Anesthesiology 100(1):9–15CrossRefPubMed Lichtenstein D, Goldstein I, Mourgeon E et al (2004) Comparative diagnostic performances of auscultation, chest radiography, and lung ultrasonography in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Anesthesiology 100(1):9–15CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Diacon AH, Brutsche MH, Solèr M (2003) Accuracy of pleural puncture sites: a prospective comparison of clinical examination with ultrasound. Chest 123(2):436CrossRefPubMed Diacon AH, Brutsche MH, Solèr M (2003) Accuracy of pleural puncture sites: a prospective comparison of clinical examination with ultrasound. Chest 123(2):436CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Talmor M, Hydo L, Gershenwald JG et al (1998) Beneficial effects of chest tube drainage of pleural effusion in acute respiratory failure refractory to positive end-expiratory pressure ventilation. Surgery 123(2):137–143CrossRefPubMed Talmor M, Hydo L, Gershenwald JG et al (1998) Beneficial effects of chest tube drainage of pleural effusion in acute respiratory failure refractory to positive end-expiratory pressure ventilation. Surgery 123(2):137–143CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Colice GL, Curtis A, Deslauriers J et al (2000) Medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions: an evidence-based guideline. Chest 118(4):1158–1171CrossRefPubMed Colice GL, Curtis A, Deslauriers J et al (2000) Medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions: an evidence-based guideline. Chest 118(4):1158–1171CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Keeling AN, Leong S, Logan PM et al (2008) Empyema and effusion: outcome of image-guided small-bore catheter drainage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31(1):135–141CrossRefPubMed Keeling AN, Leong S, Logan PM et al (2008) Empyema and effusion: outcome of image-guided small-bore catheter drainage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31(1):135–141CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Vignon P, Chastagner C, Berkane V et al (2005) Quantitative assessment of pleural effusion in critically ill patients by means of ultrasonography. Crit Care Med 33(8):1757–1763CrossRefPubMed Vignon P, Chastagner C, Berkane V et al (2005) Quantitative assessment of pleural effusion in critically ill patients by means of ultrasonography. Crit Care Med 33(8):1757–1763CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Koyanagi T, Kawaharada N, Kurimoto Y et al (2010) Examination of intercostal arteries with transthoracic Doppler sonography. Echocardiography 27(1):17–20CrossRefPubMed Koyanagi T, Kawaharada N, Kurimoto Y et al (2010) Examination of intercostal arteries with transthoracic Doppler sonography. Echocardiography 27(1):17–20CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Olinger A, Shurtleff E (2012) Posterior intercostal artery tortuosity and collateral branch points: a cadaveric study. Folia Morphol 71(4):245–251 Olinger A, Shurtleff E (2012) Posterior intercostal artery tortuosity and collateral branch points: a cadaveric study. Folia Morphol 71(4):245–251
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Carney M, Ravin CE (1979) Intercostal artery laceration during thoracocentesis: increase risk in elderly patients. Chest 75(4):520–522CrossRefPubMed Carney M, Ravin CE (1979) Intercostal artery laceration during thoracocentesis: increase risk in elderly patients. Chest 75(4):520–522CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Davies HE, Merchant S, McGown A (2008) A study of the complications of small bore ‘Seldinger’ intercostal chest drains. Respirology 13(4):603–607CrossRefPubMed Davies HE, Merchant S, McGown A (2008) A study of the complications of small bore ‘Seldinger’ intercostal chest drains. Respirology 13(4):603–607CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Davies HE, Davies RJ, Davies CW (2010) Management of pleural infection in adults: British Thoracic Society pleural disease guideline 2010. Thorax 65(Suppl 2):ii41–ii53CrossRefPubMed Davies HE, Davies RJ, Davies CW (2010) Management of pleural infection in adults: British Thoracic Society pleural disease guideline 2010. Thorax 65(Suppl 2):ii41–ii53CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Sohara Y (2008) Reexpansion pulmonary edema. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 14(4):205–209PubMed Sohara Y (2008) Reexpansion pulmonary edema. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 14(4):205–209PubMed
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Gumus S, Yucel O, Gamsizkan M et al (2010) The role of oxidative stress and effect of alpha-lipoic acid in reexpansion pulmonary edema: an experimental study. Arch Med Sci 6(6):848–853CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gumus S, Yucel O, Gamsizkan M et al (2010) The role of oxidative stress and effect of alpha-lipoic acid in reexpansion pulmonary edema: an experimental study. Arch Med Sci 6(6):848–853CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Mahfood S, Hix WR, Aaron BL et al (1988) Reexpansion pulmonary edema. Ann Thorac Surg 45:340–345CrossRefPubMed Mahfood S, Hix WR, Aaron BL et al (1988) Reexpansion pulmonary edema. Ann Thorac Surg 45:340–345CrossRefPubMed
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Matsuura Y, Nomimura T, Murakami H et al (1991) Clinical analysis of reexpansion pulmonary edema. Chest 100(6):1562–1566CrossRefPubMed Matsuura Y, Nomimura T, Murakami H et al (1991) Clinical analysis of reexpansion pulmonary edema. Chest 100(6):1562–1566CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
An easier and safe affair, pleural drainage with ultrasound in critical patient: a technical note
verfasst von
Luigi Vetrugno
Giovanni Maria Guadagnin
Daniele Orso
Enrico Boero
Elena Bignami
Tiziana Bove
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2018
Verlag
Springer Milan
Erschienen in
The Ultrasound Journal / Ausgabe 1/2018
Print ISSN: 2036-3176
Elektronische ISSN: 2524-8987
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-018-0098-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2018

The Ultrasound Journal 1/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.