Randomized controlled trial of peripherally inserted central catheters vs. peripheral catheters for middle duration in-hospital intravenous therapy

Peripheral intravenous catheter infection and failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Peripheral intravenous catheters are the most frequently used invasive device in nursing practice, yet are commonly associated with complications. We performed a systematic review to determine the prevalence of peripheral intravenous catheter infection and all-cause failure.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched for observational studies and randomised controlled trials that reported peripheral intravenous catheter related infections or failure. The review was limited to English language and articles published from the year 2000. Pooled estimates were calculated with random-effects models. Meta-analysis of observation studies in epidemiology guidelines and the Cochrane process for randomised controlled trials were used to guide the review. Prospero registration number: CRD42022349956.

FINDINGS

Our search retrieved 34,725 studies. Of these, 41 observational studies and 28 randomised controlled trials (478,586 peripheral intravenous catheters) met inclusion criteria. The pooled proportion of catheter-associated bloodstream infections was 0.028 % (95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.009-0.081; 38 studies), or 4.40 catheter-associated bloodstream infections per 100,000 catheter-days (20 studies, 95 % CI: 3.47-5.58). Local infection was reported in 0.150 % of peripheral intravenous catheters (95 % CI: 0.047-0.479, 30 studies) with an incidence rate of 65.1 per 100,000 catheter-days (16 studies; 95 % CI: 49.2-86.2). All cause peripheral intravenous catheter failure before treatment completion occurred in 36.4 % of catheters (95 % CI: 31.7-41.3, 53 studies) with an overall incidence rate of 4.42 per 100 catheter days (78,891 catheter days; 19 studies; 95 % CI: 4.27-4.57).

INTERPRETATION

Peripheral intravenous catheter failure is a significant worldwide problem, affecting one in three catheters. Per peripheral intravenous catheter, infection occurrence was low, however, with over two billion catheters used globally each year, the absolute number of infections and associated burden remains high. Substantial and systemwide efforts are needed to address peripheral intravenous catheter infection and failure and the sequelae of treatment disruption, increased health costs and poor patient outcomes.

Cost-utility analysis of different venous access devices in breast cancer patients: a decision-based analysis model

BACKGROUND

Venous access devices commonly used in clinical practice for long-term chemotherapy of breast cancer include central venous catheters (CVCs), peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs), and implantable venous access ports (IVAPs). CVCs and PICCs are less costly to place but have a higher complication rate than IVAPs. However, there is a lack of cost-utility comparisons among the three devices. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of three catheters for long-term chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

This study used propensity score matching (PSM) to establish a retrospective cohort. Decision tree models were used to compare the cost-effectiveness of three different intravenous lines in breast cancer chemotherapy patients. Cost parameters were derived from data extracted from the outpatient and inpatient charging systems, and total costs included costs of placement, maintenance, extraction, and handling of complications; utility parameters were derived from previous cross-sectional survey results of the research group; and complication rates were derived from breast cancer catheterization patient information as well as follow-up information. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured for efficacy outcomes. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to compare the three strategies. To assess uncertainty in model parameters, sensitivity analyses (univariate sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis) were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 10,718 patients (3780 after propensity score matching) were included. IVAPs had the smallest cost-utility ratio, and PICCs had the largest cost-utility ratio when left in place for more than 12 months. The incremental cost-utility ratio of PICC to CVC was $2375.08/QALY, IVAP to PICC was $522.01/QALY, and IVAP to CVC was $612.98/QALY. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios showed that IVAPs were more effective than CVCs and PICCs. Model regression analysis showed that the IVAP was recommended as the best regimen regardless of the catheter indwelling time (6 months, 12 months or more than 12 months). The reliability and stability of the model were verified by single-factor sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulation (probabilistic sensitivity analysis).

CONCLUSION

This study provides economic evidence for the selection of vascular access in breast cancer chemotherapy patients. In the case of limited resources in China, establishing a decision tree model comparing the cost-effectiveness of three vascular access devices for breast cancer chemotherapy patients determined that the IVAP was the most cost-effective regimen.

Asia-Pacific guidelines for standardization of appropriate selection, placement, and management of vascular access devices

Vascular access devices (VADs) are common and essential in the healthcare setting. However, several factors influence VAD selection and management. Wide variations in VAD practices and the degree of VAD awareness are noted across Asia-Pacific (APAC) countries. An international panel was convened that applied the ASA 2020 method to develop standard criteria for use of VADs in the APAC region. After a literature search, scenarios related to VAD use, care, and maintenance were developed according to the patient population, indication for insertion, and duration of use. These scenarios were rated on a scale of 1-5 (1 being strongly disagreed and 5 strongly agreed) by 11 expert members. A total of 48 clinical scenarios were developed: 23 in hospitalized patients, 3 in critical patients, 4 in cancer settings, 7 pertinent to VAD placement, and 11 for VAD maintenance. The multidisciplinary panel generated several recommendations for the use, care, and management of VADs across general hospitalized patients with or without difficult venous access, critically ill patients, patients with malignancy, patients with different stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) with or without dialysis, and in other special populations through evidence-based standards. These recommendations may help in achieving uniformity in practice patterns and improving the quality of VAD care and quality of life of patients in APAC region.

Comparing Complication Rates of Midline Catheter vs Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and midlines are commonly used devices for reliable vascular access. Infection and thrombosis are the main adverse effects of these catheters. We aimed to evaluate the relative risk of complications from midlines and PICCs.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. The primary outcomes were catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) and thrombosis. Secondary outcomes evaluated included mortality, failure to complete therapy, catheter occlusion, phlebitis, and catheter fracture. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

Results

Of 8368 citations identified, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria, including 1 RCT and 19 observational studies. Midline use was associated with fewer patients with CRBSI compared with PICCs (odds ratio [OR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.15-0.38). This association was not observed when we evaluated risk per catheter. No significant association was found between catheters when evaluating risk of localized thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. A subgroup analysis based on location of thrombosis showed higher rates of superficial venous thrombosis in patients using midlines (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.48-3.57). We did not identify any significant difference between midlines and PICCs for the secondary outcomes.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that patients who use midlines might experience fewer CRBSIs than those who use PICCs. However, the use of midline catheters was associated with greater risk of superficial vein thrombosis. These findings can help guide future cost-benefit analyses and direct comparative RCTs to further characterize the efficacy and risks of PICCs vs midline catheters.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters Versus Central Venous Catheters for in-Hospital Parenteral Nutrition

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the use of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) by a vascular access team (VAT) versus central venous catheters (CVCs) for in-hospital total parenteral nutrition (TPN).

METHODS

The study used a cost-effectiveness analysis based on observational data retrospectively obtained from electronic medical records from 2018 to 2019 in a teaching hospital. We included all interventional procedures requiring PICCs or CVCs with the indication of TPN. We recorded the costs of insertion, maintenance, removal, and complications. The main outcome measure was the incidence rate of catheter-associated bacteremia per 1000 catheter days. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the hospital perspective within the context of the publicly funded Spanish health system. Confidence intervals for costs and effectiveness differences were calculated using bootstrap methods.

RESULTS

We analyzed 233 CVCs and 292 PICCs from patients receiving TPN. Average duration was longer for PICC (13 versus 9.4 days, P < 0.001). The main reason for complications in both groups was suspected infection (9.77% CVC versus 5.18% PICC). Complication rates due to bacteremia were 2.44% for CVC and 1.15% for PICC. The difference in the incidence of bacteremia per 1000 catheter days was 1.29 (95% confidence interval, -0.89 to 3.90). Overall, costs were lower for PICCs than for CVCs: the difference in mean overall costs was -€559.9 (95% confidence interval, -€919.9 to -€225.4). Uncertainty analysis showed 86.37% of results with lower costs and higher effectiveness for PICC versus CVC.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of PICC by VAT compared with CVC for TPN reduces costs and may decrease the rate of bacteremia.

Central Venous Access and the Risk for Thromboembolic Events in Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

Thromboembolic events (TEE) are high-risk complications in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and radical cystectomy (RC) for urothelial muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). The purpose of the study was to investigate any differences in TEE-incidence, comparing peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) versus a totally implanted port (PORT) as CVA (central venous access) during NAC. We identified 947 cystectomized MIBC-patients from four Swedish medical centers in 2009-2021. Inclusion criteria were cT2-T4aN0M0 and 375 patients were finally eligible and evaluated, divided into: NAC-administered (n = 283) resp. NAC-naïve-NAC-eligible (n = 92), the latter as tentative control group. Data on TEEs and types of CVA were retrospectively collected and individually validated, from final transurethral resection of the bladder tumor (TUR-B) to 30 days post-RC. Adjusted logistic regression and log rank test were used for statistical analyses. Amongst NAC-administered, 83% (n = 235) received PICCs and 15% (n = 42) PORTs. Preoperative TEEs occurred in 38 PICC-patients (16.2%) and in one PORT-patient (2.4%), with 47 individual events registered. We found a significantly increased odds ratio of TEE in NAC-administered PICC-patients compared to in PORT-patients (OR: 8.140, p-value: 0.042, 95% CI 1.078-61.455). Our findings indicate a greater risk for pre-RC TEEs with PICCs than with PORTs, suggesting favoring the usage of PORTs for MIBC-NAC-patients.

Heparin versus 0.9% sodium chloride locking for prevention of occlusion in central venous catheters in adults

BACKGROUND

Intermittent locking of central venous catheters (CVCs) is undertaken to help maintain their patency and performance. There are systematic variations in care: some practitioners use heparin (at different concentrations), whilst others use 0.9% sodium chloride (normal saline). This review looks at the effectiveness and safety of intermittent locking with heparin compared to normal saline, to see if the evidence establishes whether one is better than the other. This is an update of an earlier Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of intermittent locking of CVCs with heparin versus normal saline in adults to prevent occlusion.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 20 October 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials in adults ≥ 18 years of age with a CVC that compared intermittent locking with heparin at any concentration versus normal saline. We excluded studies on infants and children from this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were occlusion of CVCs and duration of catheter patency. Our secondary outcomes were CVC-related bloodstream infections and CVC-related colonisation, mortality, haemorrhage, heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia, CVC-related thrombosis, number of additional CVC insertions, abnormality of coagulation profile and allergic reactions to heparin. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one new RCT with 30 participants for this update. We included a total of 12 RCTs with 2422 participants. Data for meta-analysis were available from all RCTs. We noted differences in methods used by the included studies and variation in heparin concentrations (10 to 5000 IU/mL), time to follow-up (1 to 251.8 days), and the unit of analysis used (participant, catheter, line access). Five studies included ICU (intensive care unit) patients, two studies included oncology patients, and the remaining studies included miscellaneous patients (chronic kidney disease, haemodialysis, home care patients, etc.). Primary outcomes Overall, combined results may show fewer occlusions with heparin compared to normal saline but this is uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.95; 10 studies; 1672 participants; low-certainty evidence). We pooled studies that used participant or catheter as the unit of analysis. We carried out subgroup analysis by unit of analysis. No clear differences were detected after testing for subgroup differences (P = 0.23). We found no clear evidence of a difference in the duration of catheter patency with heparin compared to normal saline (mean difference (MD) 0.44 days, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.99; 6 studies; 1788 participants; low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes We found no clear evidence of a difference in the following outcomes: CVC-related bloodstream infections (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.08 to 5.80; 3 studies; 1127 participants; very low-certainty evidence); mortality (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.31; 3 studies; 1100 participants; very low-certainty evidence); haemorrhage (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 5.74; 3 studies; 1197 participants; very low-certainty evidence); or heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.27; 3 studies; 443 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The main reasons for downgrading the certainty of evidence for the primary and secondary outcomes were unclear allocation concealment, suspicion of publication bias, imprecision and inconsistency.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain whether intermittent locking with heparin results in fewer central venous catheter occlusions than intermittent locking with normal saline in adults. Low-certainty evidence suggests that heparin may have little or no effect on catheter patency duration. Although we found no evidence of differences in safety (CVC-related bloodstream infections, mortality, or haemorrhage), the combined studies were not powered to detect rare adverse events such as heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia. Further research conducted over longer periods would reduce the current uncertainties.

Securing jugular central venous access devices with dressings fixed to a liquid adhesive in an intensive care unit population: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Central venous access devices (CVADs) can have high rates of failure due to dressing-related complications. CVADs placed in the internal jugular vein are at particular risk of dressing failure-related complications, including catheter-associated bloodstream infection and medical adhesive-related skin injury. Application of Mastisol liquid adhesive (MLA) may reduce CVAD dressing failure and associated complications, by reducing the frequency of dressing changes. The aim of this study is to investigate whether, in an intensive care unit (ICU) population, standard dressing care with or without the addition of MLA, improves internal jugular CVAD dressing adherence.

METHODS

This two-arm, parallel group randomised controlled trial will be conducted in three Australian ICUs. A total of 160 patients (80 per group) will be enrolled in accordance with study inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients will be randomised to receive either (1) 'standard' (in accordance with local hospital policy) CVAD dressings (control) or (2) 'standard' dressings in addition to MLA (intervention). Patients will be followed from the time of CVAD insertion to 48 h after CVAD removal. The primary outcome is 'dressing failure' defined as requirement for initial CVAD dressing to be replaced prior to seven days (routine replacement).

DISCUSSION

This study will be the first randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of MLA in the adult intensive care unit population and will also provide crucial data for patient-important outcomes such as infection and skin injury.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12621001012864 . Registered on 2 August 2021.

Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Insertion Training Reduces Use of Midline Catheters in Hospitalized Patients With Difficult Intravenous Access

OBJECTIVES

Difficult intravenous (IV) access (DIVA) is a prevalent condition in the hospital setting and increases utilization of midline catheters (MCs) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous (USGPIV) insertion is effective at establishing intravenous access in DIVA but remains understudied in the inpatient setting. We evaluated the effect of an USGPIV simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) curriculum for nurses on MC and PICC utilization for hospitalized patients.

METHODS

We performed a quasi-experimental observational study. We trained nurses across all inpatient units at a large tertiary care hospital. We queried the electronic medical record to compare PICC and MC utilization for patients with DIVA during 3 periods: before USGPIV SBML training (control), during pilot testing of the intervention, and during the SBML intervention. To account for variations in insertion practices over time, we performed an interrupted time series (ITS) analysis between 2 periods, the combined control and pilot periods and the intervention period.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-eight nurses completed USGPIV SBML training. Midline catheters inserted monthly per 1000 patient-days for DIVA decreased significantly from 1.86 ± 0.51 (control) to 2.31 ± 0.28 (pilot) to 1.33 ± 0.51 (intervention; P = 0.001). The ITS analysis indicated a significant intervention effect (P < 0.001). Peripherally inserted central catheters inserted monthly per 1000 patient-days for DIVA also significantly decreased over the study periods; however, the ITS failed to show an intervention effect as PICC insertions were already decreasing during the control period.

CONCLUSIONS

A hospital-wide USGPIV SBML curriculum for inpatient nurses was associated with a significant reduction in MCs inserted for DIVA.

Comparison of 2 Midline Catheter Devices With Differing Antithrombogenic Mechanisms for Catheter-Related Thrombosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Data regarding upper extremity midline catheter (MC)-related thrombosis (CRT) are sparse, with some evidence indicating that MCs have a high rate of CRT.

OBJECTIVE

To compare 2 MCs with differing antithrombogenic mechanisms for this outcome.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this parallel, 2-arm randomized clinical trial, 496 adult patients hospitalized at a tertiary care suburban academic medical center who received an MC were assessed for eligibility between January 1, 2019, and October 31, 2020, and 212 were randomized.

INTERVENTIONS

Inpatients were randomized to receive a 4F antithrombotic MC (MC-AT) or a 4.5F antithrombotic and antimicrobial MC (MC-AT-AM).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was symptomatic midline CRT inclusive of deep vein thrombosis or superficial venous thrombophlebitis within 30 days after insertion. Secondary outcomes included catheter-associated bloodstream infection and catheter failure.

RESULTS

A total of 191 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.2 [16.7] years; 114 [59.7%] female) were included in the final analysis: 94 patients in the MC-AT group and 97 in the MC-AT-AM group. Symptomatic midline CRT occurred in 7 patients (7.5%) in the MC-AT group and 11 (11.3%) in the MC-AT-AM group (P = .46). Deep vein thrombosis occurred in 5 patients (5.3%) in the MC-AT group and 5 patients (5.2%) in the MC-AT-AM group (P > .99). Pulmonary embolism occurred in 1 patient in the MC-AT group. No catheter-associated bloodstream infection occurred in either group. Premature catheter failure occurred in 22 patients (23.4%) in the MC-AT group and 20 (20.6%) in the MC-AT-AM group (P = .64). In Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, no statistically significant difference was found between groups for the risk of catheter failure (hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.67-2.43; P = .46).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

No difference was found in thrombosis in MCs with 2 distinct antithrombogenic mechanisms; however, the risk of CRT in both groups was high. Practitioners should strongly consider the safety risks associated with MCs when determining the appropriate vascular access device.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03725293.

PICC versus midlines: Comparison of peripherally inserted central catheters and midline catheters with respect to incidence of thromboembolic and infectious complications

INTRODUCTION

To decrease the complications related to central catheters there has been an increasing utilization of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) and ultrasound-guided long peripheral intravenous catheters (i.e. midlines). While the complications of PICC lines are well described there is less reported data on complications related to midline catheters. Our study aims are to compare the incidences of infectious and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and sepsis related to PICCs and Midlines.

METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective review at an academic hospital. Data were collected on patients admitted between 1/1/2014-5/31/2016. Patient demographics, hospital length of stay (LOS), and ventilator days were collected. Outcomes of interest were line-related infections and thromboembolic events after the placement of these catheters. Endpoints were compared between three groups (PICC group, midline group and PICC placement followed by midline placement group). Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to compare across the three groups.

RESULTS

The study included 3560 unique patients with 5058 catheters. There was an increase in use of midlines over the observed study period (245% increase from the end of 2015 to the middle of 2016). We found no significant differences in the rates of DVT among the three groups (PICC 4%, midline 3% and PICC-midline 4%; p = 0.12). There were no differences across the groups for sepsis (PICC 29%, midline 27%, and PICC-midline 32%; p = 0.14) or septic shock (PICC 7%, midline 8%, and PICC-midline 6%; p = 0.39). Adjusted means LOS were higher for patients with PICC lines compared to midlines, in both females and males. PICC group stayed longer, on average, on the ventilator compared to the midline group. No other significant differences were seen among groups.

CONCLUSION

Increased utilization of midline catheters were not associated with decreased risk of DVT or sepsis when compared to peripherally inserted central catheters.

Multidisciplinary cooperative mode led by infusion nurse specialists used to ensure the nursing quality of peripherally inserted central catheters in China: A 5-year retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of multidisciplinary cooperation mode (MCM) led by infusion nurse specialists (INSs) on peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) catheterization and indwelling nursing quality.

METHODS

Participants' demographic information, catheter types, catheterization approaches, puncture site, tip position, professional title of nurses, success rate of catheterization, consultation rate, detection rate of complications and outcome improvement rate of 6576 outpatients and hospitalized patients with PICC were analyzed retrospectively by a software named "questionnaire stars," in a large tertiary general hospital in Shanghai, from January 2015 to December 2019. SPSS 26.0 for Windows was used for data collection and description, Chi-square test were used for statistical analysis of enumeration data, and p < 0.05 was statistically significant.

RESULTS

According to the catheter types' data, the use rate of three-way valve catheters decreased from 79.9% to 14.5%, while the use rate of three-way valve solo catheters increased from 12.7% to 51.6%, and the use rate of power injectable and open-ended catheters increased from 7.4% to 33.9%. According to the data of PICC catheterization method, conventional technology decreased significantly from 16.8% to 1.1%, modified Seldinger technique (MST) increased gradually from 26.1% to 51.3%, while ultrasound guided modified Seldinger technique (US and MST) decreased slightly from 57.2% to 47.6%. 7.5% catheter tip ends were malpositioned while nine indwelled PICCs were traced to have tip end malposition. The consultation rate was significantly higher than that before applying MCM led by INSs (x² = 151.713, p < 0.05). After applying MCM led by INSs, the detection rate of complications was significantly higher than before (x² = 5.499, p < 0.05), the rate of successful insertion at one time was significantly higher than before (x² = 187.589, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

After the application of INSs-led MCM, progresses have been achieved. The nursing quality of patients' PICC was significantly improved than before.

Intravenous access placement and fluid administration appropriateness in the emergency department

The aim of this study is to assess practice and effectiveness of Peripheral Venous Catheter (PVC) insertion and intravenous fluid administration in the Emergency Department (ED). A prospective study was conducted at a single primary ED in Brescia, Italy. 455 participants were included in the analysis. PVC were placed in 88 % of patients, 18 gauge catheters were the most frequently used (63%). In 360 patients PVC placement required one attempt. In 99 % of patients PVCs were used at least once. Fluid administration was considered appropriate in 23 patients. Out of 402 PVC placements, 244 were not necessary (in 225 patients PVCs were used only for blood samples withdrawal, and in 16 patients they were used for blood samples withdrawal, and inappropriate fluid administration). We concluded that a large number of PVC placements in the ED was potentially avoidable, and, when PVCs were used for IV fluid administration, the indication was often inappropriate. Physicians should carefully assess the real need of PVC placement in patients admitted to the ED and critically assess some issues of everyday practice, like PVC placement or IV fluids prescription, with evaluation of cost savings.

The incidence of asymptomatic thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central catheter in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis People's

Aim

To examine the incidence and risk factors for asymptomatic peripherally inserted central catheter‐related thrombosis (PICC‐RT).

Design

We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis following the PRISMA guidelines.

Methods

The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020186732). A systematic search of EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane was performed from inception to 4 June 2020. Meta‐analysis was performed to determine the pooled incidence of asymptomatic PICC‐RT.

Results

Ten studies comprising 1591 participants with 1592 PICCs were included in this meta‐analysis. The pooled incidence of asymptomatic PICC‐RT in adults was 22% (95% CI, 0.17–0.29). The pooled incidence of PICC‐RT in cancer patients was 19% (95% CI, 0.13–0.26). Asymptomatic PICC‐RT mainly occurred in superficial veins. Most asymptomatic thrombosis occurred 3–12 days after the PICC insertion. A higher Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score (ECOG), slower blood flow velocity and left basilic vein were independent risk factors of asymptomatic thrombosis.

Standards of the nutritional support process in Spain - Towards benchmarking

Introduction

Introduction: quality indicators have been proposed in Spain for assessing the various stages of clinical nutrition. However, reference standards for these indicators (feasible and relevant) based on daily practice of artificial nutrition are not available. Goals: the goal of this study was to propose quality indicators standards for their routine application to artificial nutrition in clinical practice. Material and methods: a multicenter, cross-sectional study-based on a survey applied to health professionals in the field of clinical nutrition-on the fulfilment of eight quality criteria was carried out during 2018 and 2019. The total number of processes and those that were correctly accomplished were assessed and compared with the corresponding proposed theoretical standard. Results: fifteen centers were assessed. Of eight indicators assessed, five were within the theoretical standard (correct identification of parenteral nutrition bags, semi-upright position of patients on enteral nutrition, administration of micronutrients in ready-to-use parenteral nutrition bags, checking placement of feeding tubes, and days with glycemia below 60 mg/dL). Two indicators were very close to the theoretical standard. One indicator, hyperglycemia in patients with parenteral nutrition, was far removed from its theoretical standard (15.7 % vs. 5 %). Conclusion: the administration of artificial nutrition in Spanish hospitals was performed with a high quality level. Therefore, standards based on daily clinical practice regarding artificial nutrition in Spain are proposed.

The Influence of Venous Characteristics on Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter-Related Symptomatic Venous Thrombosis in Cancer Patients

Background

With increasing use, peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are associated with the risk of venous thrombosis. Few studies have focused on the relationships between venous thrombosis and venous characteristics. This study aimed to identify effects of venous characteristics on symptomatic PICC-related venous thrombosis in cancer patients and explore the relationship between venous characteristics and blood flow velocity.

Methods

The data of patients who underwent placement of PICC were retrospectively studied between January 2015 and September 2017. Symptomatic PICC-related venous thrombosis was confirmed by ultrasound. Univariable, multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the risk factors associated with PICC-related venous thrombosis. In October 2017, 169 patients with PICCs were enrolled prospectively, and the relationships between blood flow velocity and venous characteristics were recorded and analyzed.

Results

A total of 2933 cancer patients were enrolled in this study; of these patients, 68 experienced symptomatic venous thrombosis. In the bivariate analysis, body mass index (BMI), history of venous thrombosis, triglycerides, tumor category, vessel diameter, vessel depth and arm circumference were associated with thrombosis. The multivariable analyses showed that arm circumference, vascular diameter, triglyceride level and tumor category were independent risk factors for thrombosis. Blood flow velocity was positively correlated with vessel depth and arm circumference but not with vessel diameter.

Conclusion

Different venous characteristics can lead to different blood flow rates, which can affect the incidence of thrombosis. A vein depth of greater than 1.07cm or less than 0.57cm was associated with a higher incidence of PICC-related venous thrombosis, and the greater the arm circumference and vessel diameter, the greater the risk of venous thrombosis.

The efficacy of midline catheters-a prospective, randomized, active-controlled study

OBJECTIVES

This study was performed to investigate whether an intravenous (IV) strategy based on new-generation midline catheters is an efficacious alternative to a conventional IV strategy consisting of peripheral venous catheters and central venous catheters, for patients needing IV therapy exceeding 5 days.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Patients requiring more than 5 days of IV treatment were randomized to either a midline catheter-based IV strategy or a conventional strategy. The primary endpoint was the composite of the insertion of a central venous catheter (CVC) or the need for four or more peripheral venous catheter (PVC) insertions. The secondary outcomes included catheter dwell times and reasons for premature removal.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty patients were included. The fraction of patients receiving four or more PVCs or having a CVC inserted was 12/58 (21%) in the midline group versus 38/58 (66%) in the conventional group (p <  0.001); the number needed to treat was 2.2. The median overall catheter dwell time was 7 days (range 0-60 days) in the midline group and 4 days (range 0-84 days) in the conventional group (p =  0.002).

CONCLUSION

In patients requiring more than 5 days of IV therapy, a midline catheter strategy reduced the need for insertion of a CVC or four or more PVCs.

Association between ABO blood group and venous thrombosis related to the peripherally inserted central catheters in cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the potential relation between the ABO blood group and the risk of venous thrombosis in cancer patients with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs).

METHODS

The patients who underwent PICC catheterization in Beijing Cancer Hospital from January 2018 to October 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The general information, disease diagnosis, catheterization situation, and complications were recorded for each patient. Further, the blood group status was identified using the hospital information systems. Logistic and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were performed to identify the risk factors for symptomatic PICC-related thrombosis.

RESULTS

Among the 2315 patients, 131 had symptomatic thrombosis after PICC catheterization. The incidence of symptomatic thrombosis was lower in patients with blood type O when compared with that in patients with blood types other than O. The history of venous thrombosis, tumor category, arm circumference, and insertion attempts are risk factors associated with the PICC-related venous thromboembolism (VTE). After multivariable adjustment, insertion attempts and the non-O blood type were observed to remain associated with thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

The risk of PICC-related thrombosis in patients with non-O blood type is significantly higher than that in patients with blood type O.

Prognostic factors for venous thrombosis in patients with peripherally inserted central catheters: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has become increasingly popular in clinical practice because of the ease and safety of insertion and lower cost-effectiveness. The precise incidence and risk of PICC-related venous thrombosis is important to be verified in the context of growing PICC use and an understanding of the risk of venous thrombosis is an important cost and patient safety question.

METHOD

We will search seven electronic databases including the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Chinese BioMedical Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese VIP and Wangfang Database regardless of publication date or language. All studies with prognostic factor analysis will be included if they recruited participants with PICC. Primary outcomes will include venous thrombosis. The risk of bias will be assessed by 2 authors using quality in prognostic studies tool. If possible, a meta-analysis in fixed or random effects model will be conducted by R-3.5.1 software, otherwise a narrative synthesis will ensue focusing on prognostic factors. The confidence in cumulative evidence will be assessed by Based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

RESULTS

The aim of this study is to retrieve, appraise and summarize the clinical evidence of risk assessment for PICC-related venous thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will assess the precise incidence and risk of venous thrombosis in patients with PICC and provide references for establishing relevant assessment tools.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factors for venous thrombosis in PICC patients. This review will be published in a journal and disseminated in print by peer-review.

The microbial biofilm composition on peripherally inserted central catheters: A comparison of polyurethane and hydrophobic catheters collected from paediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Peripherally inserted central catheters are susceptible to microbial colonisation and subsequent biofilm formation, leading to central line-associated bloodstream infection, a serious peripherally inserted central catheter-related complication. Next-generation peripherally inserted central catheter biomaterials, such as hydrophobic materials (e.g. Endexo^®), may reduce microbial biofilm formation or attachment, consequently reducing the potential for central line-associated bloodstream infection.

METHODS

Within a randomised controlled trial, culture-dependent and culture-independent methods were used to determine if the biomaterials used in traditional polyurethane peripherally inserted central catheters and hydrophobic peripherally inserted central catheters impacted microbial biofilm composition. This study also explored the impact of other clinical characteristics including central line-associated bloodstream infection, antibiotic therapy and dwell time on the microbial biofilm composition of peripherally inserted central catheters.

RESULTS

From a total of 32 patients, one peripherally inserted central catheter was determined to be colonised with Staphylococcus aureus, and on further analysis, the patient was diagnosed with central line-associated bloodstream infection. All peripherally inserted central catheters (n = 17 polyurethane vs n = 15 hydrophobic) were populated with complex microbial communities, including peripherally inserted central catheters considered non-colonised. The two main microbial communities observed included Staphylococcus spp., dominant on the colonised peripherally inserted central catheter, and Enterococcus, dominant on non-colonised peripherally inserted central catheters. Both the peripherally inserted central catheter biomaterial design and antibiotic therapy had no significant impact on microbial communities. However, the diversity of microbial communities significantly decreased with dwell time.

CONCLUSION

More diverse pathogens were present on the colonised peripherally inserted central catheter collected from the patient with central line-associated bloodstream infection. Microbial biofilm composition did not appear to be affected by the design of peripherally inserted central catheter biomaterials or antibiotic therapy. However, the diversity of the microbial communities appeared to decrease with dwell time.

Risk factors for peripherally inserted central catheter line-related deep venous thrombosis in critically ill intensive care unit patients

Introduction:

Central venous access using peripherally inserted central catheters is frequently used for patients receiving intravenous medications in the hospital or outpatients. Although there are several benefits of peripherally inserted central catheters, such as ease of insertion, low procedure-related risk and higher patient satisfaction, there are complications associated with peripherally inserted central catheter use. Despite some studies evaluating peripherally inserted central catheter line–related complications, the factors associated with peripherally inserted central catheter–related deep venous thrombosis in critically ill medical-surgical patients are poorly described. The objective of this case-control study was to identify the risk factors associated with peripherally inserted central catheter line–related deep venous thrombosis in critically ill medical-surgical intensive care unit patients in a community hospital.

Methods:

We abstracted relevant clinical data from 21 cases with symptomatic peripherally inserted central catheter–related deep venous thrombosis and 42 controls with peripherally inserted central catheters but no deep venous thrombosis.

Results:

Of the factors evaluated, female gender, the use of triple lumen peripherally inserted central catheters, larger outer diameter, and open (vs valve) peripherally inserted central catheters were associated with venous thrombosis. In this retrospective study, we did not identify any association of peripherally inserted central catheter–related deep venous thrombosis with a prior history of deep venous thrombosis, use of alteplase, antiplatelet therapy, prophylactic or therapeutic anticoagulation, international normalized ratio, platelet count and the use of peripherally inserted central catheters for total parenteral nutrition.

Conclusion:

Our study indicates that the catheter size relative to the diameter of the vein could be an important risk factor for the development of peripherally inserted central catheter–related deep venous thrombosis. The study findings should be confirmed in a larger study designed to identify risk factors of peripherally inserted central catheter–related deep venous thrombosis. In the meantime, the peripherally inserted central catheter lines should be used judiciously in critically ill patients.

Patient experiences with peripherally inserted venous catheters- A cross-sectional, multicentre study in Norway

Aim

To investigate patient experiences with peripherally inserted venous catheters, namely PICC lines and Midlines, as well as the influence of socio-demographic variables, length of stay, comorbidity and complications on these experiences.

Design

The study had a descriptive, multicentre, cross-sectional design.

Methods

We used a questionnaire to investigate patient experiences (N = 359).

Results

Patients experiences were not optimal on each of the items in the questionnaire. Nevertheless, few respondents would have preferred a traditional peripheral venous catheter instead. Moreover, free-text answers indicated that patients were very satisfied with their catheter. Results also indicate that the hospitals have different approach when selecting a PICC line or a Midline as route of choice. The only factor associated with patient experiences was "complications."

Conclusion

Even though patients reported of several disadvantages with the PICC line/Midline, findings indicate that they would have chosen this again. PICC lines and Midlines are beneficial from the patients' perspective, even though they have disadvantages.

Appropriateness of peripherally inserted central catheter use among general medical inpatients: an observational study using routinely collected data

Background

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) are among the most commonly used medical devices in hospital. This study sought to determine the appropriateness of inpatient PICC use in general medicine at five academic hospitals in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, based on the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC).

Methods

This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study of general internal medicine patients discharged between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2015 who received a PICC during hospitalisation. The primary outcomes were the proportions of appropriate and inappropriate inpatient PICC use based on MAGIC recommendations. Hospital administrative data and electronic clinical data were used to determine appropriateness of each PICC placement. Multivariable regression models were fit to explore patient predictors of inappropriate use.

Results

Among 3479 PICC placements, 1848 (53%, 95% CI 51% to 55%) were appropriate, 573 (16%, 95% CI 15% to 18%) were inappropriate and 1058 (30%, 95% CI 29% to 32%) were of uncertain appropriateness. The proportion of appropriate and inappropriate PICCs ranged from 44% to 61% (p<0.001) and 13% to 21% (p<0.001) across hospitals, respectively. The most common reasons for inappropriate PICC use were placement in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (n=500, 14%) and use for fewer than 15 days in patients who are critically ill (n=53), which represented 14% of all PICC placements in the intensive care unit. Patients who were older, female, had a Charlson Comorbidity Index score greater than 0 and more severe illness based on the Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score were more likely to receive an inappropriate PICC.

Conclusions

Clinical practice recommendations can be operationalised into measurable domains to estimate the appropriateness of PICC insertions using routinely collected hospital data. Inappropriate PICC use was common and varied substantially across hospitals in this study, suggesting that there are important opportunities to improve care.

Cost analysis comparison between peripherally inserted central catheters and implanted chest ports in patients with cancer-A health economic evaluation of the PICCPORT trial

BACKGROUND

A reliable central venous access device is a cornerstone in the treatment of cancer. Both peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) and totally implanted chest ports (PORT) are commonly used for the delivery of chemotherapy. Both types of catheter can cause adverse events such as catheter-related deep venous thrombosis (CR-DVT), infection and mechanical complications.

METHOD

We conducted a randomized controlled trial including 399 patients with cancer and performed a health economic evaluation investigating the cost related to PICCs and PORTs using several clinically relevant dimensions from a healthcare perspective. The cost was determined using process and cost estimate models.

RESULT

PICCs are associated with a higher total cost when compared with PORTs. Combining the costs of all categories, the prize per inserted device was 824.58 EUR for PICC and 662.34 EUR for PORT. When adjusting for total catheter dwell time the price was 6.58 EUR/day for PICC and 3.01 EUR/day for PORT. The difference in CR-DVT was the main contributor to the difference in cost. The daily cost of PICC is approximately twice to that of PORT.

CONCLUSION

We have demonstrated that the cost from a healthcare perspective is higher in cancer patients receiving a PICC than to those with a PORT. The difference is driven mainly by the cost related to the management of adverse events. Our findings are relevant to anaesthetists, oncologists and vascular access clinicians and should be considered when choosing vascular access device prior to chemotherapy.

Peripherally inserted central venous catheter placed and maintained by a dedicated nursing team for the administration of antimicrobial therapy vs. another type of catheter: a retrospective case-control study

INTRODUCTION

Data concerning the use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) for the administration of intravenous (IV) antimicrobials in the acute care setting is scarce.

METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective case-control study (1:1). Case subjects were defined as patients who received IV antimicrobial treatment through a PICC line placed and maintained by specifically trained nurses (PICC group). Control subjects were defined as patients who received antimicrobial therapy by a peripheral or a central venous catheter (CVC) (control group). Control subjects were matched by type of antimicrobial, causative microorganism of the infection that was being treated and duration of treatment. An event leading to undesired catheter removal (ELUCR) was defined as any circumstance which lead to the removal of the indwelling catheter other than the completion of the scheduled course of antimicrobial therapy.

RESULTS

The study included 50 patients in each group. The total follow-up time was 1376 catheter-days for the PICC group and 1362 catheter-days for the control group. We observed a significantly lower incidence of ELUCR in the PICC group (0.2 versus 7.7 events per 100 catheter-days; P<0.001). When the incidence of ELUCR was analyzed according to the duration of indwelling catheterisation for each type of catheter (divided into one-week intervals), differences between both groups were also significant (P-values≤0.001 for the first three weeks of treatment). During the second week of IV treatment, only one patient in the PICC group (2.1%) developed an ELUCR compared to 19 (38.8%) in the control group (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A PICC placed and maintained by a dedicated nursing team is an excellent alternative to peripheral venous catheters or CVCs for administrating antimicrobial therapy for both short and long periods of treatment.

Economic evaluation of peripherally inserted central catheter and other venous access devices: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

With the widespread use of peripherally inserted central catheters, plenty of studies have compared peripherally inserted central catheters with other venous access devices to choose the most appropriate device in different clinical scenarios. Economic attributes are one of the important influencing factors in the selection of venous access devices. Several economic evaluation studies have been conducted in this area, but the evaluation methods, contents, outcomes, and quality of these economic studies have not been systematically evaluated. Therefore, we aimed to map the existing research on the economic evaluations of peripherally inserted central catheters and other venous access devices to provide economic evidence for decision-makers to choose a suitable venous access device. Second, we appraised the quality of economic evaluation studies in this area to highlight methodological weaknesses and provide an outline for the normative application of this methodology for future research.

METHODS

A literature search was undertaken through 11 databases from inception until 11 March 2019, to identify economic evaluation studies comparing peripherally inserted central catheters with other venous access devices. After screening articles and extracting data independently, we summarized methods, contents, and outcomes of the included studies and appraised their methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for economic evaluations.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included. Among the six studies comparing peripherally inserted central catheters with peripheral intravenous catheters, four studies performed a cost-effectiveness analysis and noted that peripherally inserted central catheters were more cost-effective than peripheral intravenous catheters. Two studies performed a cost analysis to compare peripherally inserted central catheters with peripheral intravenous catheters during the insertion and maintenance/removal periods but reached different conclusions. Seven of the included studies performed a cost analysis to compare peripherally inserted central catheters with central venous catheters. They pointed out that the catheter insertion costs of peripherally inserted central catheters were lower than those for central venous catheters in developed countries, whereas the opposite conclusion was reached in developing countries. Conversely, conclusions regarding the costs for catheter maintenance and catheter insertion and maintenance/removal were inconsistent. Six of the included studies performed a cost analysis to compare peripherally inserted central catheters with vascular access ports. They pointed out that the insertion costs of peripherally inserted central catheters were lower than those for vascular access ports, and the maintenance costs were higher than those for vascular access ports. Conversely, conclusions regarding the costs for catheter insertion and maintenance/removal were inconsistent. In addition, the methodological quality of the included studies had plenty of deficiencies, including no discounting, no sensitivity analysis, no incremental analysis, a lack of validity of costs and effectiveness, and so on.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review highlighted the desperate paucity of economic evaluation studies of peripherally inserted central catheters and other venous access devices in amount, evaluation contents, and economic evaluation methods. The conclusions of the cost-effectiveness analysis of peripherally inserted central catheters with other venous access devices were consistent. Conversely, the conclusions of the cost analysis of peripherally inserted central catheters with other venous access devices were inconsistent mainly in the comparison of peripherally inserted central catheters with peripheral intravenous catheters, central venous catheters, and vascular access ports during the insertion and maintenance/removal periods. This review also highlighted many methodological issues of economic evaluations in this area. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct more high-quality economic evaluation studies on peripherally inserted central catheters and other venous access devices by performing cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, or cost-benefit analysis from catheter insertion to removal to provide evidence for clinical practitioners, patients, and decision-makers to choose a suitable venous access device in different clinical scenarios.

Early mortality attributable to PICC-lines in 4 public hospitals of Marseille from 2010 to 2016 (Revised V3)

INTRODUCTION

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC-line) are devices inserted through peripheral venous access. In our institution, this technology has been rapidly adopted by physicians in their routine practice. Bacteremia on catheters remains an important public health issue in France. However, the mortality attributable to bacteremia on PICC-line remains poorly evaluated in France and in the literature in general. We report in our study an exhaustive inventory of bacteremia on PICC-line and their 30 days mortality, over a 7 years period.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From January 2010 to December 2016, we retrospectively matched PICC-line registers of the radiology department, blood culture records of the microbiology laboratory and medical records from the Hospital Information Systems.

RESULTS

The 11,334 hospital stays during which a PICC-line was inserted were included over a period of 7 years. Among them, 258 episodes of PICC-line-associated bacteremia were recorded, resulting in a prevalence of 2.27%. Hematology units: 20/324 (6.17%), oncology units: 55/1375 (4%) and hepato-gastro-enterology units: 42/1142 (3.66%) had the highest prevalence of PICC-line related bacteremia. The correlation analysis, when adjusted by exposure and year, shows that the unit profile explains 72% of the variability in the rate of bacteremia with a P = .023. Early bacteremia, occurring within 21 days of insertion, represented 75% of cases. The crude death ratio at 30 days, among patients PICC-line associated bacteremia was 57/11 334 (0.50%). The overall 30-day mortality of patients with PICC-line with and without bacteremia was 1369/11334 (12.07%). On day 30, mortality of patients with bacteremia associated PICC-line was 57/258 or 22.09% of cases, compared to a mortality rate of 1311/11076, or 11.83% in the control group (P < .05, RR 2.066 [1.54-2.75]). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a statistically significant excess mortality between patients with PICC-line associated bacteremia and PICC-line carriers without bacteremia (P < .0007, hazard ratio 1.89 [1307-2709]).

CONCLUSION

Patients with PICC-line associated bacteremia have a significant excess mortality. The implementation of a PICC-line should remain the last resort after a careful assessment of the benefit/risk ratio by a senior doctor.

Peripherally inserted central catheter in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Infusion of haematopoietic cells and complications

AIMS

To analyze the incidence of complications related to the central peripheral insertion catheter and the viability of the infusion of haematopoietic stem cells through volumetric perfusion pumps.

METHOD

Prospective descriptive study that includes all patients who received a haematopoietic transplant in the Haematology Service of the Hospital Clínico de Valencia between January and December 2016 (n=73). All of them received a central peripheral insertion catheter. SPSS™ v22 was used to perform the descriptive analysis of the main variables using a confidence interval of 95%. The student's t-test was used to compare the means of two independent samples assuming unequal variances.

RESULTS

The 63% (n=73) of the catheters remained without problems throughout the procedure. Fever of unknown origin (28.8%) was the main cause of catheter removal. The median number of days for haematological recovery was 12.5 for the autologous transplants and 15 for the allogeneic transplants.

CONCLUSIONS

The central peripheral insertion catheter presents few complications related to insertion. The administration of haematopoietic cells through these catheters with volumetric perfusion pumps does not imply a delay in haematological recovery. Good acceptance by the patient is confirmed.

The anticoagulants rivaroxaban and low molecular weight heparin prevent PICC-related upper extremity venous thrombosis in cancer patients

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) is often applied in chemotherapy patients and commonly causes upper extremity venous thrombosis (UEVT), which should be prevented.To assess the preventive effects of the anticoagulants rivaroxaban and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on UEVT in patients receiving chemotherapy through PICCs.A total of 423 chemotherapy patients with continuous PICC use between January 2014 and June 2015 at the Oncology Department of Dongying People's Hospital were divided into 3 groups: rivaroxaban (10 mg/day, orally), LMWH (Enoxaparine, 4000 anti-Xa IU/day, subcutaneous injection), and control (no anticoagulant). UEVT incidence and other complications during PICC use were observed and recorded.The rivaroxaban, LMWH, and control groups included 138 (79 males; 54.9 ± 11.0 years), 144 (76 males; 56.0 ± 10.9 years), and 141 (71 males; 53.3 ± 10.9 years) patients, (P = .402 and P = .623 for age and sex respectively). There were no differences in cancer location (P = .628), PICC implantation site (P > .05), body mass index (BMI) (P = .434), blood pressure (all P > .05), blood lipids (5 laboratory parameters included, all P > .5), smoking (P = .138), history of lower limb venous thrombosis (P = .082), and 10 other associated comorbidities (all P > .5). Twenty-nine patients withdrew from the study (5 from the rivaroxaban, 12 from the LMWH, and 12 from the control groups, respectively), and 394 patients were analyzed. There were significant differences in the rivaroxaban group and the LMWH group compared to the control group (P = .010 and P = .009, respectively), but no significant difference was observed between the rivaroxaban group and the LMWH group (P = .743).Anticoagulants such as rivaroxaban and LMWH may reduce the incidence of PICC-related UEVT in patients receiving chemotherapy.

Comparison of Venous Thrombosis Complications in Midlines Versus Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: Are Midlines the Safer Option?

Catheter-related (CR) thrombosis is a significant complication of midline catheters (MCs) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). Limited existing data for MCs suggest a favorable complication profile for MCs. To compare incidence of CR thrombosis between MCs and PICCs and to evaluate the impact of quantity of lumens and catheter diameter on CR thrombosis. This was a retrospective comparison spanning 13 months of MCs and PICCs for symptomatic CR thrombosis at an 1100 bed tertiary care academic medical center. Adult patients who had an MC or a PICC placed by the were included. Data were collected using the electronic medical record. Statistical analysis was performed using SAS software. A total of 2577 catheters were included in the analysis with 1094 MCs and 1483 PICCs. One hundred thirty (11.88%) MCs developed CR thrombosis (deep vein thrombosis [DVT] or superficial venous thrombophlebitis [SVT]) as compared to 112 (6.88%) PICCs (odds ratio [OR]: 1.82; P < .0001). Midline catheters had a 53% greater odds of developing CR DVT than PICCs (7.04% MCs and 4.72% PICCs; OR: 1.53; P = .0126). For CR SVT, MCs have a 2.29-fold greater odds of developing CR SVT than PICCs (4.84% MCs and 2.16% PICCs; OR: 2.29; P = .0002). For MCs and PICCs, the incidence of CR thrombosis was 13.50% for double lumen/5F lines and was 6.92% for single lumen/4F lines (OR: 2.10; P = <.0001). Symptomatic CR thrombosis is a serious, life-threatening complication that occurs more frequently in MCs compared to PICCs. Inserters should consider placement of single lumen catheters with the smallest diameter to reduce this risk when a midline is used.

Clinical impact of peripherally inserted central catheters vs implanted port catheters in patients with cancer: an open-label, randomised, two-centre trial

BACKGROUND

Centrally inserted totally implanted vascular access ports (PORTs) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are widely used for the administration of chemotherapy. Our aim was to study the incidence of catheter-related deep venous thrombosis in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy through either a PICC or a PORT.

METHODS

Adults with non-haematological cancer (mainly breast and colorectal) from two Swedish oncology centres were included and followed for up to 1 yr. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a single-lumen PICC or PORT. The primary end point was the occurrence of a clinically significant catheter-related deep venous thrombosis, and the secondary end point was a composite of adverse events related to the catheter: insertion complication, thrombosis, occlusion, infection, and mechanical problems.

RESULTS

The trial recruited 399 participants (PICC, n=201; PORT, n=198) between March 2013 and February 2017. The PICCs were associated with 16 (8%) deep venous thromboses compared with two (1%) in the PORT group (HR=10.2; 95% confidence interval, 2.3-44.6; P=0.002). The overall incidence of composite adverse events was higher for patients with a PICC compared with those with a PORT (HR=2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-4.6; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PICCs are associated with higher risk for catheter-related deep venous thrombosis and other adverse events when compared with PORTs. This increased risk should be considered when choosing a vascular access device for chemotherapy, especially in patients with solid malignancy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01971021.

Economic evaluation of the treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections (ABSSSIs) from the national payer perspective: introduction of a new treatment to the patient journey. A simulation of three European countries

Background: The aim of this study was to develop a spending predictor model to evaluate the direct costs associated with the management of ABSSSIs from the National health-care provider's perspective of Italy, Romania, and Spain. Methodology: A decision-analytic model was developed to evaluate the diagnostic and clinical pathways of hospitalized ABSSSI patients based on scientific guidelines and real-world data. A Standard of Care (SoC) scenario was compared with a dalbavancin scenario in which the patients could be discharged early. The epidemiological and cost parameters were extrapolated from national administrative databases (i.e., hospital information system). A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and one-way sensitivity analysis (OWA) were performed. Results: Overall, the model estimated an average annual number of patients with ABSSSIs of approximately 50,000 in Italy, Spain, and Romania. On average, the introduction of dalbavancin reduced the length of stay by 3.3 days per ABSSSI patient. From an economic perspective, dalbavancin did not incur any additional cost from the National Healthcare perspective, and the results were consistent among the countries. The PSA and OWA demonstrated the robustness of these results. Conclusion: This model represents a useful tool for policymakers by providing information regarding the economic and organizational consequences of an early discharge approach in ABSSSI management.

Peripherally inserted central catheters in critically ill patients - complications and its prevention: A review

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) is extensively used in critical care settings, because it plays a vital role in providing safe central venous entry. However, PICC is associated with several complications, which should be detected to shorten the duration of patients' improvement, reduce health care cost, and lessen the incidence of various PICC-related complications. Therefore, this study aimed to outline current literature on PICC procedures, potential complications, and measures for prevention. Understanding evidence-based guidelines regarding insertion technique, early detection of complications, and care bundle of PICC is significant in complication prevention. Implementation of education, training, and appropriate multidisciplinary approaches on PICC care among nurses and caregivers is the key to preventing complications. Thus, the strict care of indwelling PICC lines, the targeted and reasonable PICC-associated complication prevention, and nursing care have a major clinical significance in reducing the occurrence of potential PICC complications.

PERIPHERAL VENIPUNCTURE: COMPREHENSION AND EVALUATION OF NURSING PRACTICES

ABSTRACT Objective: to understand the nursing practices related to peripheral venipuncture and to analyze the incidence of complications in patients with venous catheters. Method: mixed design, involving: case study, sectional study, cohort study and focus group. The sample consisted of nurses and patients from a medical clinic in Portugal. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were performed. Results: stressors capable of influencing nursing practices were identified, including: the decisions of the medical team, the age and characteristics of the venous network of the patient, the availability of other catheters in the institution, the low level of knowledge of nurses regarding the care of patients in the insertion, maintenance and removal of the peripherally inserted central venous catheter. The following complications and their respective incidences were documented in patients with peripheral venous catheters: phlebitis (22.2%), obstruction (27.7%), fluid exiting through insertion site (36.1%), infiltration (38.8%) and accidental catheter removal (47.2%). Catheter obstruction with an incidence of 22.2% was only observed in those who used the peripherally inserted central venous catheter. The following benefits were observed with the use of the peripherally inserted central venous catheter: safe administration of drugs; pain reduction, number of venous punctures and complications. Conclusions: the peripherally inserted central venous catheter is presented as a valid and viable alternative that can improve the quality of nursing care and the safety and well-being of patients.

Comparison of Complication Rates of Central Venous Catheters Versus Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters in Pediatric Patients

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of our study is to compare the rate of central line-associated blood stream infections and venous thromboembolism in central venous catheters versus peripherally inserted central catheters in hospitalized children. There is a growing body of literature in adults describing an increased rate of venous thromboembolisms and similar rates of central line-associated blood stream infection associated with peripherally inserted central catheters versus central venous catheters. It is not known if the rate of central line-associated blood stream infection and venous thromboembolism differs between peripherally inserted central catheters and central venous catheters in children. Based on current adult literature, we hypothesize that central line-associated blood stream infection rates for peripherally inserted central catheters and central venous catheters will be similar, and the rate of venous thromboembolism will be higher for peripherally inserted central catheters versus central venous catheters.

DESIGN

This is a cohort study using retrospective review of medical records and prospectively collected hospital quality improvement databases.

SETTING

Quaternary-care pediatric hospital from October 2012 to March 2016.

PATIENTS

All patients age 1 day to 18 years old with central venous catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters placed during hospital admission over the study dates were included. Central venous catheters that were present upon hospital admission were excluded. The primary outcomes were rate of central line-associated blood stream infection and rate of venous thromboembolism.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Of 2,709 catheters included in the study, 1,126 were peripherally inserted central catheters and 1,583 were central venous catheters. Peripherally inserted central catheters demonstrated a higher rate of both infection and venous thromboembolism than central venous catheters in all reported measures. In multivariable analysis, peripherally inserted central catheters had increased association with central line-associated blood stream infection (odds ratio of 3.15; 95% CI, 1.74-5.71; p = 0.0002) and increased association with venous thromboembolism (odds ratio of 2.71; 95% CI, 1.65-4.45; p < 0.0001) compared with central venous catheters.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of central line-associated blood stream infection and venous thromboembolism were higher in hospitalized pediatric patients with peripherally inserted central catheters as compared to central venous catheters. Our study confirms the need for further investigation into the safety of central access devices to assist in proper catheter selection.

Heparin versus 0.9% sodium chloride locking for prevention of occlusion in central venous catheters in adults

BACKGROUND

Intermittent locking of central venous catheters (CVCs) is undertaken to help maintain their patency. There are systematic variations in care: some practitioners use heparin (at different concentrations), whilst others use 0.9% NaCl (normal saline). This review looks at the effectiveness and safety of intermittent locking with heparin compared to 0.9% NaCl to see if the evidence establishes whether one is better than the other. This work is an update of a review first published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of intermittent locking of CVCs with heparin versus normal saline (NS) in adults to prevent occlusion.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (last searched 11 June 2018) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 5). Searches were also carried out in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and clinical trials databases (11 June 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials in adults ≥ 18 years of age with a CVC that compared intermittent locking with heparin at any concentration versus NS. We applied no restriction on language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed quality, and extracted data. We contacted trial authors to retrieve additional information, when necessary. We carried out statistical analysis using Review Manager 5 and assessed the overall quality of the evidence supporting assessed outcomes using GRADE. We carried out prespecified subgroup analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five new studies for this update (six prior studies were included in the original review), bringing the number of eligible studies to 11, with a total of 2392 participants. We noted differences in methods used by the included studies and variation in heparin concentrations (10 to 5000 IU/mL), time to follow-up (1 to 251.8 days), and the unit of analysis used (participant, catheter, line access).Combined results from these studies showed fewer occlusions with heparin than with NS (risk ratio (RR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.95; P = 0.02; 1672 participants; 1025 catheters from 10 studies; I² = 14%) and provided very low-quality evidence.We carried out subgroup analysis by unit of analysis (testing for subgroup differences (P = 0.23; I² = 30.3%). When the unit of analysis was the participant, results show no clear differences in all occlusions between heparin and NS (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.08; P = 0.15; 1672 participants; seven studies). Subgroup analysis using the catheter as the unit of analysis shows fewer occlusions with heparin use (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.95; P = 0.03; 1025 catheters; three studies). When the unit of analysis was line access, results show no clear differences in occlusions between heparin and NS (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.40; 770 line accesses; one study).We found no clear differences in the duration of catheter patency (mean difference (MD) 0.44 days, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.99; P = 0.11; 1036 participants; 752 catheters; six studies; low-quality evidence).We found no clear evidence of a difference in the following: CVC-related sepsis (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.03 to 19.54; P = 0.86; 1097 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence); mortality (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.31; P = 0.33; 1100 participants; three studies; low-quality evidence); haemorrhage at any site (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.57 to 3.07; P = 0.52; 1245 participants; four studies; moderate-quality evidence); or heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.27; P = 0.31; 443 participants; three studies; low-quality evidence).The main reasons for downgrading the quality of evidence were unclear allocation concealment, imprecision, and suspicion of publication bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the very low quality of the evidence, we are uncertain whether intermittent locking with heparin results in fewer occlusions than intermittent locking with NS. Low-quality evidence suggests that heparin may have little or no effect on catheter patency. Although we found no evidence of differences in safety (sepsis, mortality, or haemorrhage), the combined trials are not powered to detect rare adverse events such as heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia.

Simplified equation for determining proper depth of peripherally inserted central catheter in relation to anatomical landmarks

Background

The aim of this study was to develop a formula guiding the peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) tip placement based on anatomical landmarks such as the upper arm, clavicle, and sternum as well as the patient’s height, weight, and body mass index.

Methods

Fifty-five patients who were scheduled to have PICCs were included in the study. We measured four distances along the passage of the PICC, which were as follows; the tip of the third finger to the middle of the elbow crease (Distance A), the middle of the elbow crease to the acromion process (Distance B), the acromion process to the sternal head of the clavicle (Distance C), and the sternal head of the clavicle to the end of the xiphoid process (Distance D). The lengths from the elbow creases to their carina bifurcations as determined by fluoroscopy during PICC insertions were recorded and used as reference.

Results

The formula for determining PICC depth based on the four distances was determined by regression analysis. The optimal formula was determined to be 25.3 + 0.5 × (Distance C) + 0.6 × (Distance D) which yielded an R² value of 0.3.

Conclusions

The formula proposed for proper depth of the adult, 25.0 + 0.5 × (clavicle length) + 0.6 × (sternum length) for PICC insertion can be used to place the tip at the carina bifurcation level. The distance from elbow crease to catheter insertion point should be added to the length generated by this formula.

Chlorhexidine-coated peripherally inserted central catheters reduce fibroblastic sleeve formation in an in vivo ovine model

Purpose:

This study compared an antimicrobial and anti-thrombogenic peripherally inserted central catheter treated with a chlorhexidine-based technology, a peripherally inserted central catheter with bulk distributed fluoro-oligomers, and a poly 2-methoxyethyl acrylate–based peripherally inserted central catheter to an untreated peripherally inserted central catheter (control) in an ovine model at 14 and 30 days post-implant.

Methods:

One of four types of peripherally inserted central catheters was surgically implanted into the left jugular vein of each of 18 sheep for 14 or 30 days. Blood analysis consisted of complete blood counts, serum chemistries, and coagulation (fibrinogen, prothrombin time, and partial thromboplastin time) profiles. Sheep were sacrificed to examine the vein and thorax. Histological analysis was performed on serial catheter sections using standard microscopy on hematoxylin and eosin–stained tissues.

Results:

All catheters developed fibroblastic sleeves at both 14 and 30 days. The chlorhexidine-peripherally inserted central catheter showed a 64% lower mean fibroblastic sleeve weight and a 66% shorter mean fibroblastic sleeve length compared to the untreated control at 14 days. By 30 days, compared to untreated control, the chlorhexidine-peripherally inserted central catheter showed 81% lower mean fibroblastic sleeve weight with 75% shorter mean fibroblastic sleeve length, the fluoro-oligomer-peripherally inserted central catheter showed 54% lower mean sheath weight with 40% shorter mean fibroblastic sleeve length, and the poly 2-methoxyethyl acrylate-peripherally inserted central catheter had 41% lower mean fibroblastic sleeve weight with 57% lower fibroblastic sleeve length.

Conclusion:

Among the three anti-thrombogenic peripherally inserted central catheter technologies, the chlorhexidine-peripherally inserted central catheter had the smallest fibroblastic sleeves, followed by the fluoro-oligomer-peripherally inserted central catheter, poly 2-methoxyethyl acrylate-peripherally inserted central catheter, and control peripherally inserted central catheter.

A Randomized Trial of Central Venous Catheter Type and Thrombosis in Critically Ill Neurologic Patients

BACKGROUND

Observational studies suggest peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) are associated with a high risk of catheter-related large vein thrombosis (CRLVT) in critically ill neurologic patients. We evaluated the difference in thrombosis risk between PICCs and centrally inserted central venous catheters (CICVCs).

METHODS

We conducted a pragmatic, randomized controlled trial of critically ill adult neurologic patients admitted to neurological and trauma critical care units at two level I trauma centers. Patients were randomized to receive either a PICC or CICVC and undergo active surveillance for CRLVT or death within 15 days of catheter placement.

RESULTS

In total, 39 subjects received a PICC and 41 received a CICVC between February 2012 and July 2015. The trial was stopped after enrollment of 80 subjects due to feasibility affected by slow enrollment and funding. In the primary intention-to-treat analysis, 17 (43.6 %) subjects that received a PICC compared to 9 (22.0 %) that received a CICVC experienced the composite of CRLVT or death, with a risk difference of 21.6 % (95 % CI 1.57-41.71 %). Adjusted common odds ratio of CRLVT/death was significantly higher among subjects randomized to receive a PICC (adjusted OR 3.08; 95 % CI 1.1-8.65). The higher adjusted odds ratio was driven by risk of CRLVT, which was higher in those randomized to PICC compared to CICVC (adjusted OR 4.66; 95 % CI 1.3-16.76) due to increased large vein thrombosis without a reduction in proximal deep venous thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our trial demonstrates that critically ill neurologic patients who require a central venous catheter have significantly lower odds of ultrasound-diagnosed CRLVT with placement of a CICVC as compared to a PICC.

Umbilical Venous Catheter Versus Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter in Neonates: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) and umbilical venous catheter (UVC) in terms of success rate, complications, cost and time of insertion in neonatal intensive care were compared. Neonates requiring vascular access for minimum 7 days were included. Sample size of 72 per group was determined. Trial was registered at Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI/2015/02/005529). Success rates of the UVC and PICC were 68.1% and 65.3%, respectively (p = 0.724). Mean (SD) time needed for PICC and UVC insertion was 34.13 (34.69) and 28.31 (17.19) min, respectively (p = 0.205). Mean (SD) cost of PICC insertion vs. UVC insertion was 60.9 (8.6) vs. 11.9 (8.7) US dollars (p < 0.0001). Commonest cause for failure of UVC was displacement [6 (8.3%)] and that for PICC was blockage [9 (12.5%)].

CONCLUSIONS

UVC is a cheaper alternative to PICC, with similar success rate, short-term complications and time needed for insertion.

Inpatient Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheter Complications: Should Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Lines be Placed in the Intensive Care Unit Setting?

Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) are now commonly used for central access in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting; however, there is a paucity of data evaluating the complication rates associated with these lines. We performed a retrospective review of all PICCs placed in the inpatient setting at our institution during a 1-year period from January 2013 to December 2013. These were divided into two groups: those placed at the bedside in the ICU and those placed by interventional radiology in non-ICU patients. Data regarding infectious and thrombotic complications were collected and evaluated. During the study period, 1209 PICC line placements met inclusion criteria and were evaluated; 1038 were placed by interventional radiology in non-ICU patients, and 171 were placed at the bedside in ICU patients. The combined thrombotic and central line associated blood stream infection rate was 6.17 per cent in the non-ICU group and 10.53 per cent in the ICU group (P = 0.035). The thrombotic complication rate was 5.88 per cent in the non-ICU group and 7.60 per cent in the ICU group (P = 0.38), whereas the central line associated blood stream infection rate was 0.29 per cent in the non-ICU group and 2.92 per cent in the ICU group (P = 0.002). This study seems to suggest that PICC lines placed at the bedside in the ICU setting are associated with higher complication rates, in particular infectious complications, than those placed by interventional radiology in non-ICU patients. The routine placement of PICC lines in the ICU settings needs to be reevaluated given these findings.

[Risk factors associated with complications that required the removal of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in a tertiary pediatric hospital]

BACKGROUND

In pediatrics, complications of the peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) are reported in 30% to 40% of cases, with the most frequent risk factors being the age of the patient and the location of PICC. The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of PICCs and to identify factors related to their withdrawal due to complications.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study. Patients from 2 months to 18 years of age were included and followed-up until PICC was withdrawn. Age, sex, medications administered, PICC location, caliber, the number of lumens, days PICC was on the patient, and the reason for withdrawal was recorded. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-five patients were included. In 33.02%, PICC were withdrawn due to complications. In the bivariate analysis, age and location were factors associated with complications. A Cox proportional hazards model was performed. It was identified that only the caliber thickness (hazard ratio (HR): 0.5, confidence interval (CI)95%: 0.35-0.99) was associated with any complication, and age (HR: 1.02, CI95%: 1-1.04) only to the withdrawal of PICC due to suspected phlebitis.

CONCLUSIONS

PICC withdrawal due to complications was performed in 33% of the patients. Risk factors related to complications were PICC caliber thickness and age.