# Can the rigid stylet from an intravenous catheter be an alternative vascular access device for intraosseous catheterisation?

## TL;DR

This study shows that an IV catheter stylet can work as an alternative for emergency intraosseous access in dogs.

## Contribution

Demonstrates that a 16-gauge IV catheter stylet is a viable alternative to a 15-gauge IO needle for emergency vascular access.

## Key findings

- The 16-gauge IV catheter had lower pressure during hand infusion compared to the 15-gauge IO needle.
- Gravity infusion pressures were similar between the two catheter types.
- The 16-gauge IV catheter had a longer insertion time but similar success rates to the 15-gauge IO needle.

## Abstract

It may be challenging for practitioners to secure vascular access in animals, especially in a state of shock.

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical relevance of commercial 16‐gauge intravenous (IV) catheter stylet vs. 15‐gauge intraosseous (IO) vascular access in emergencies.

Six healthy dogs were used in this study. After general anaesthesia, IO catheterisation was performed on both trochanteric fossae of the femurs using a commercial 16‐gauge IV catheter stylet and EZIO 15‐gauge IO needle. The pressures were measured by manual, gravity and mechanical infusion for 5 min each. Additionally, insertion time and success rate were recorded.

In hand infusion, mean pressure of a 16‐gauge IO (605.06 ± 49.13 mmHg) was statistically lower than that of a 15‐gauge EZIO IO catheterisation (718.84 ± 93.09 mmHg). In gravity infusion, there was no significant difference in pressure during injection between the 16‐gauge IV catheter (52.23 ± 14.48 mmHg) and 15‐gauge EZIO IO catheterisation (50.68 ± 11.89 mmHg). In mechanical infusion, mean pressure of the 15‐gauge EZIO IO catheterisation (128.25 ± 50.16 mmHg) was lower than that of the 16‐gauge IV catheter (152.56 ± 67.23 mmHg). The insertion times of a 16‐gauge IV catheter and 15‐gauge EZIO IO catheterisation were 16.79 ± 0.92 and 11.65 ± 1.70 s, respectively. The success rates of the insertion were similar between both groups.

This study shows that IO catheterisation with a commercial IV catheter stylet can be an alternative method of IO catheterisation in an emergency, especially for rapid vascular access.

In this study, we investigated 16‐gauge intravenous (IV) catheters as an alternative to 15‐gauge intraosseous (IO) catheters. Based on our results, we concluded that IO catheterisation using an IV catheter can be an alternative to 15‐gauge EZIO catheterisation.