Printer Friendly

A case of needle-free delivery system incompatibility.

It has become standard practice to use closed, needle-free connectors on peripheral intravenous lines to reduce needle-stick injuries1. However, there have been compatibility issues reported in recent literature. For instance, the use of pre-filled syringes is incompatible with the CLAVE connectors2.

We report a further equipment incompatibility between the V3-GISS triple lumen peripheral set from Go Medical Industries (Subiaco, WA) and the Smart Site needle-free valve port 200E from Alaris (Dublin, Ohio, USA) (Figure 1). This incompatibility was encountered during the recent case of a 70-year-old male, ASA II, undergoing cystocopy and transurethral resection of the prostate. An 18-gauge BD Insyte catheter with a Smart Site needle-free valve port 200E was inserted into a superficial vein on the dorsum of the right hand. A V3-GISS triplelumen peripheral set was connected to this port with a 1 litre bag of compound sodium lactate connected via an administration set to the primary arm of the peripheral set. The patient underwent a single-shot spinal with 3 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine and, following repositioning, was commenced on a propofol target-controlled infusion at 1.2 [micro]g/minute for sedation. The propofol was connected to the fluid giving set port. Approximately five minutes after commencement of the target-controlled infusion, the patient's systolic blood pressure was recorded at 89 mmHg from a starting pressure of 140 mmHg. It was decided to give a 0.5 mg bolus of metaraminol via one of the two spare lumens on the V3-GISS triple-lumen peripheral set. However, neither of these ports was usable. As a result, the propofol had to be temporarily ceased to enable the administration of metaraminol.


On connection on the V3-GISS triple lumen set directly to the BD Insyte cannula, following removal of the Smart Site needle-free valve port 200E, all three lumens were useable. We note with interest that the triple-lumen peripheral sets manufactured by Alaris are compatible with the needle-free valve port 200E. We suggest that this incompatibility needs to be more widely recognised.


(1) Russo PL, Harrington GA, Spelman DW. Needleless intravenous 1. systems: a review. Am J Infect Control 1999; 27:431-434.

(2) McCallum SR, Graham GR, Sigston PE. Blocked syringe with 2. use of needle-free connector. Anaesthesia 2007; 62:94-95.

J. D. Doyle

R. H. Riley

Perth, Western Australia
COPYRIGHT 2009 Australian Society of Anaesthetists
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2009 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Doyle, J.D.; Riley, R.H.
Publication:Anaesthesia and Intensive Care
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:8AUST
Date:Jul 1, 2009
Previous Article:Jackson spinal table failure: a possible design flaw.
Next Article:Effect of pre-emptive alveolar recruitment strategy before pneumoperitoneum on arterial oxygenation during laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters