Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter lines for Intensive Care Unit and onco-hematologic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

BackgroundIt is unclear whether Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) lines are associated with lower complication rates as compared to conventional Central Venous Catheters (CVCs), especially in high risk patients. ObjectiveTo compare Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (CLABSI) and catheter-related thrombosis rates in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and onco-hematologic patients with PICC lines and CVCs. MethodsWe systematically reviewed the PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases to identify relevant studies. Study quality was evaluated using appropriate assessment tools and the pooled odds ratio (OR) and confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Sensitivity analyses were performed based on meta-analysis method, type of study and prophylaxis implementation. ResultsThirteen studies were included in our meta-analysis. PICC lines were associated with a significantly higher rate of thrombosis in ICU [OR (95%CI): 2.58(1.80,3.70); Pz<0.00001] and onco-hematologic [OR (95%CI): 2.91(2.11,4.02); Pz<0.00001] patients. CLABSI rates with PICC lines were not significantly different in ICU patients [OR (95%CI): 1.65(0.91,2.99); Pz= 0.1], but significantly lower CLABSI rates were observed in onco-hematologic patients [OR (95%CI): 0.38(0.16,0.91); Pz=0.03]. Sensitivity analyses verified the robustness of our results. ConclusionsPICC lines are associated with higher rates of thrombotic events. However, they might be suitable for onco-hematologic patients due to lower CLABSI rates.