Femoral Central Venous Catheter Research Articles

Performance of Risk Assessment Models for VTE in Patients Who Are Critically Ill Receiving Pharmacologic Thromboprophylaxis: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Pneumatic Compression for Preventing VTE Trial

BackgroundThe diagnostic performance of the available risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis is unclear. Research QuestionFor critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, do risk assessment models predict who would develop venous thromboembolism or who could benefit from adjunctive pneumatic compression for thromboprophylaxis? Study Design and MethodsIn this post hoc analysis of the PREVENT trial, we evaluated different risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism (ICU-VTE, Kucher, Intermountain, Caprini, Padua, and IMPROVE models). We constructed receiving operator characteristic curves and calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios. Additionally, we conducted subgroup analyses evaluating the effect of adjunctive pneumatic compression versus none on the study primary outcome. ResultsAmong 2003 patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, 198 (9.9%) developed venous thromboembolism. With multivariable logistic regression analysis, the independent predictors of venous thromboembolism were APACHE II score, prior immobilization, femoral central venous catheter, and invasive mechanical ventilation. All risk assessment models had areas under the curve <0.60 except for the Caprini model (0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.60, 0.68). The Caprini, Padua and Intermountain models had high sensitivity (>85%) but low specificity (<20%) for predicting venous thromboembolism, whereas ICU-VTE, Kucher, and IMPROVE models had low sensitivities (<15%), but high specificities (>85%). The positive predictive value was low (<20%) for all studied cutoff scores, whereas the negative predictive value was mostly >90%. Using the risk assessment models to stratify patients into high- versus low-risk subgroups, the effect of adjunctive pneumatic compression versus pharmacologic prophylaxis alone was not different across the subgroups (p for interaction >0.05). InterpretationThe risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism performed poorly in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. None of the models identified a subgroup of patients who might benefit from adjunctive pneumatic compression.

Adverse Events from Fluoroscopic versus Portable Placement of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters and Central Venous Catheters in Pediatric Patients

PurposeTo compare the outcomes of fluoroscopic versus portable placement of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and central venous catheters (CVCs) in pediatric patients. Materials and MethodsThis is a single-center, retrospective review of 346 upper-extremity PICC placements (286 fluoroscopic and 60 portable; mean age, 9.83 years [SD ± 5.58]; 49.1% female) and 138 tunneled femoral CVC placements (56 fluoroscopic and 82 portable; mean age, 0.23 years [SD ± 0.36]; 57.0% female). Portable placements used mobile plain-film radiography. All lines were placed by board-certified interventional radiologists. ResultsFluoroscopic PICC placements had a lower procedure time (43.9 vs 57.9 minutes; P < .001), radiation dosage (342 vs 590 mGy·cm2; P < .001), incidence of technical failure (0% vs 3.3%; P = .029), and incidence of catheter malfunction (1.7% vs 12.1%; P < .001) compared with portable PICC placements. Fluoroscopic CVC placements had a lower procedure time (42.6 vs 54.8 minutes; P < .001) and radiation dosage (63.8 vs 405 mGy·cm2; P < .001) compared with portable CVC placements. No technical failures were found in either CVC groups and the difference was nonsignificant for catheter malfunction (0% vs 7.3%; P = .081). Fluoroscopic placements of PICCs and CVCs had a lower incidence rate of central line–associated bloodstream infection compared with portable placements (0.71 vs 2.22 cases per 1,000 line-days; P = .046). Overall, fluoroscopic placements of PICCs and CVCs had fewer adverse events compared with portable placements (3.2% vs 14.8%; P < .001). Portable procedure setting was the only significant factor associated with adverse events (odds ratio, 33.77; 95% CI, 4.56–757.01). ConclusionsFluoroscopic placements of PICCs and CVCs are associated with lower procedure time, radiation dose, and risk of adverse events compared with portable placements in pediatric patients.

İnternal İliyak Vene Yerleşmiş bir Femoral Venöz Kateter Malpozisyonu: Olgu Sunumu

Central venous catheters are used for many purposes in intensive care. Venous catheterization in the femoral region is safer than others regarding mechanical complications. Although femoral catheter malpositions are rare, they can lead to fatal consequences, especially when diagnosed late. In this article, the misplaced femoral central venous catheter in the internal iliac vein is presented. A 36-year-old male patient diagnosed with respiratory failure displayed septicemia symptoms during his follow-up in the intensive care unit. A blood sample from the central catheter in the right femoral region showed bacterial growth. Therefore, a new central venous catheter was placed into the left femoral vein for an inotropic infusion. According to the abdominal computed tomography scan report performed for a different reason the next day, the catheter was seen in an incorrect position. The evaluation revealed the catheter to be situated in the internal iliac vein. The catheter was removed without complications. We share a report regarding catheter malposition found in the internal iliac vein. Physicians must keep in mind that early detection of catheter malpositions is critical. Keywords: Central venous catheters, catheterization, femoral vein, catheter-related infections

The incidence and risk factors of proximal lower extremity deep vein thrombosis without pharmacologic prophylaxis in critically ill surgical Taiwanese patients: A prospective study.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in critically ill patients has been well-studied in Western countries. Many studies have developed risk assessments and established pharmacological protocols to prevent deep venous thrombosis (DVT). However, the DVT rate and need for pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in critically ill Taiwanese patients are limited. This study aimed to prospectively determine the DVT incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in critically ill Taiwanese patients who do not receive pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis. We conducted a prospective study in a surgical intensive care unit (SICU) of a tertiary academic medical center in Taiwan. Adult patients admitted to SICU from March 2021 to June 2022 received proximal lower extremities DVT surveillance with venous duplex ultrasound. No patient received pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis. The outcomes were the incidence and risk factors of DVT. Among 501 enrolled SICU patients, 21 patients (4.2%) were diagnosed with proximal lower extremities DVT. In a multivariate regression analysis, hypoalbuminemia (odd ratio (OR) = 6.061, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.067-34.421), femoral central venous catheter (OR = 4.515, 95% CI: 1.547-13.174), ICU stays more than 10 days (OR = 4.017, 95% CI: 1.270-12.707), and swollen leg (OR = 3.427, 95% CI: 1.075-10.930) were independent risk factors for DVT. In addition, patients with proximal lower extremities DVT have more extended ventilator days (p = 0.045) and ICU stays (p = 0.044). Our findings indicate critically ill Taiwanese patients have a higher incidence of DVT than results from prior retrospective studies in the Asian population. Physicians who care for this population should consider the specific risk factors for DVT and prescribe pharmacologic prophylaxis in high-risk groups.

Central Venous Catheter Placement Skill Acquisition Through Apprenticeship Training in Clinical Context during Pediatric Critical Care Medicine Fellowship: A Longitudinal Study

AbstractPediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) fellows must develop competence in central venous catheter (CVC) placement. The impact of experiential learning opportunities in the clinical context on PCCM fellow CVC placement skill acquisition remains unknown. We sought to measure femoral CVC placement skill acquisition during fellowship and compare fellow to attending skill. We performed a prospective observational cohort study of PCCM fellows at the University of Colorado from 2019 to 2021. Femoral CVC placement skill was measured by attending evaluation of level of the supervision (LOS) required for the fellow, and hand motion analysis (HMA) on simulation task trainer. Competence in femoral CVC placement was defined as LOS ≥ 4 (can perform this skill independently) on a 5-point Likert scale. We compared fellow skill in femoral CVC placement to years of training and number of femoral CVCs placed. We also compared third-year fellow and attending HMA measurements. We recruited 13 fellows and 6 attendings. Fellows placed a median of 8 (interquartile range 7, 11) femoral CVCs during the study period. All fellows who reached third-year of fellowship during the study period achieved competence. Longitudinal analysis demonstrated improvement in CVC placement skill by both LOS and HMA as years of fellowship and number of femoral CVCs placed increased. Few third-year fellows achieved attending level skill in femoral CVC placement as measured by HMA. PCCM fellows acquired skill in CVC placement during fellowship and achieved competence in the procedure, but most did not reach attending level of skill.

Durable Vascular Access in Neonates in the Cardiac ICU: A Novel Technique for Tunneled Femoral Central Venous Catheters.

There is an ongoing need for a method of obtaining long-term venous access in critically ill pediatric patients that can be completed at the bedside and results in a durable, highly functional device. We designed a novel technique for tunneled femoral access to address this need. Herein, we describe the procedure and review the outcomes at our institution. A single-center retrospective chart review identifying patients who underwent tunneled femoral central venous catheter (tfCVC) placement between 2017 and 2021 using a two-puncture technique developed by our team. Academic, Quaternary Children's Hospital with a dedicated pediatric cardiac ICU (CICU). Patients in our pediatric CICU who underwent this procedure. Tunneled femoral central line placement. One hundred eighty-two encounters were identified in 161 patients. The median age and weight at the time of catheter placement was 22 days and 3.2 kg. The median duration of the line was 22 days. The central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rate was 0.75 per 1,000-line days. The prevalence rate of thrombi necessitating pharmacologic treatment was 2.0 thrombi per 1,000-line days. There was no significant difference in CLABSI rate per 1,000-line days between the tfCVC and nontunneled peripherally inserted central catheters placed over the same period in a similar population (-0.40 [95% CI, -1.61 to 0.82; p = 0.52]) and no difference in thrombus rates per 1,000-line days (1.37 [95% CI, -0.15 to 2.89; p = 0.081]). tfCVCs can be placed by the intensivist team using a two-puncture technique at the bedside with a high-rate of procedural success and low rate of complications. Advantages of this novel technique of obtaining vascular access include a low rate of CLABSIs, the ability to place it at the bedside, and preservation of the upper extremity vasculature.

Risk of infections in intravascular catheters in situ for more than 10 days: a post hoc analysis of randomized controlled trials

ObjectivesWe aimed to describe the infectious risk during the dwell time for different catheter types. Furthermore, we wanted to identify risk factors for infections from catheters in place for >10 days. MethodsWe performed a post hoc analysis using prospectively collected data from four randomized controlled trials. First, we evaluated the infectious risk after 10 days of analysing the significance of the interaction between dwell time and catheter type in a Cox model. Second, we investigated risk factors for infection in catheters in place for >10 days using multivariable marginal Cox models. ResultsWe included 15 036 intravascular catheters from 24 intensive care units. Infections occurred in 46 (0.7%) of 6298 arterial catheters (ACs), 62 (1.0%) of 6036 central venous catheters (CVCs) and 47 (1.7%) of 2702 short-term dialysis catheters (DCs). The interaction between dwell time beyond 10 days and catheter type was significant for CVCs (p 0.008) and DCs (p < 0.001), thus indicating an increased risk of infection after 10 days. The interaction was not significant for ACs (p 0.98). Therefore, we selected 1405 CVCs and 454 DCs in place for >10 days for further analyses. In the multivariable marginal Cox model, we observed an increased hazard ratio (HR) for infection for femoral CVC (HR, 6.33; 95% CI, 1.99–20.09), jugular CVC (HR, 2.82; 95% CI, 1.13–7.07), femoral DC (HR, 4.53; 95% CI, 1.54–13.33) and jugular DC (HR, 4.50; 95% CI, 1.42–14.21) compared with subclavian insertions. DiscussionWe showed that the risk of catheter infection for CVCs and DCs increased 10 days after insertion, thus suggesting routine replacement for nonsubclavian catheters in situ for >10 days.

P243 EXTRACORPOREAL CONTINUOUS VENO–VENOUS ULTRAFILTRATION IN PATIENTS WITH ACUTE HEART FAILURE REFRACTORY TO DIURETIC THERAPY: A SINGLE–CENTER PILOT EXPERIENCE

Abstract Introduction Congestive Acute Heart Failure (C–AHF) is characterized by extracellular fluid overload. Extensive use of loop diuretics may induce worsening renal function, electrolyte imbalance, symptomatic hypotension and diuretic resistance. Extracorporeal veno–venous ultrafiltration (UF) may represent a useful adjunctive therapy. Despite a few randomized clinical trials have been carried out, the results are controversial; aim of this study is to describe our pilot experience using UF. Methods We enrolled consecutive patients with C–AHF refractory to diuretic therapy treated with UF from January to December 2022; patients affected by concomitant acute coronary syndrome were excluded. UF was delivered using a modern device specifically designed for fluid removal in C–AHF patients through slow continuous UF (Fig.1). According to our protocol, the initial UF rate was based on baseline systolic arterial pressure (250cc/h if&amp;gt;120mmHg, 100–120cc/h if 100–120mmHg and &amp;lt;100cc/h if&amp;lt;100mmHg; contra–indicated if&amp;lt;90mmHg). Laboratories values, urinary output and fluid balance were monitored at baseline, after 6 hours (T6) and when UF was stopped (T0). Variables are expressed as medians with 25p–75p. Results Seven patients were enrolled in the study (5M;2F); in each a femoral central venous catheter (20cm/14G) was placed to perform UF. A standard anticoagulation regimen based on UFH bolus + infusion was adopted aiming to an ACT of 180–220. Median age and LVEF were respectively 40[20–50] and 79[73–85]; 3 patients were diabetics, 2 smokers and 4 hypertensive. Median rate of hospitalization in the previous 12 months was 1 [0–2]; domiciliary dosage of furosemide was 75mg [50–125]. Baseline, T6h and T0 creatinine values were respectively 1.2 [1.1–2], 1.3 [1.1–1.8] and 1.4 [1.1–1.9]. Heart rate and blood pressure were stable during the treatment. UF parameters in the patients of the study are summarized in Tab.1; congestion was resolved or improved in 6/7 patients, no severe complication (bleeding, AKI, death) occurred while 1 premature filter clot is reported. Conclusions Our initial experience with UF is promising. Modern heart failure specific devices appear safe, easy to use and require only minimal training. Compared to extensive i.v. diuretic use, predictable fluid removal through UF may be beneficial as it is characterized by higher excretion of sodium, limited neuro–hormonal activation, enhanced spontaneous diuresis and restoration of diuretic response.

Accuracy of hemodynamic parameters derived by GE E-PiCCO in comparison with PiCCO® in patients admitted to the intensive care unit

To evaluate the agreement and accuracy of a novel advanced hemodynamic monitoring (AHM) device, the GE E-PiCCO module, with the well-established PiCCO® device in intensive care patients using pulse contour analysis (PCA) and transpulmonary thermodilution (TPTD). A total of 108 measurements were performed in 15 patients with AHM. Each of the 27 measurement sequences (one to four per patient) consisted of a femoral and a jugular indicator injection via central venous catheters (CVC) and measurement using both PiCCO (PiCCO® Jug and Fem) and GE E-PiCCO (GE E-PiCCO Jug and Fem) devices. For statistical analysis, Bland–Altman plots were used to compare the estimated values derived from both devices. The cardiac index measured via PCA (CIpc) and TPTD (CItd) was the only parameter that fulfilled all a priori-defined criteria based on bias and the limits of agreement (LoA) by the Bland–Altman method as well as the percentage error by Critchley and Critchley for all three comparison pairs (GE E-PiCCO Jug vs. PiCCO® Jug, GE E-PiCCO Fem vs. PiCCO® Fem, and GE E-PiCCO Fem vs. GE E-PiCCO Jug), while the GE E-PiCCO did not accurately estimate EVLWI, SVRI, SVV, and PPV values measured via the jugular and femoral CVC compared with values assessed by PiCCO®. Consequently, measurement discrepancy should be considered on evaluation and interpretation of the hemodynamic status of patients admitted to the ICU when using the GE E-PiCCO module instead of the PiCCO® device.

Early Mobility in Patients With Femoral Catheters

Early Mobility in Patients With Femoral Catheters

Association of early mobility with the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis and mortality among critically ill patients: a post hoc analysis of PREVENT trial

BackgroundThis study assessed the mobility levels among critically ill patients and the association of early mobility with incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality.MethodsThis was a post hoc analysis of the multicenter PREVENT trial, which evaluated adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h and found no effect on the primary outcome of incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis. Mobility levels were documented daily up to day 28 in the ICU using a tool with an 8-point ordinal scale. We categorized patients according to mobility levels within the first 3 ICU days into three groups: early mobility level 4–7 (at least active standing), 1–3 (passive transfer from bed to chair or active sitting), and 0 (passive range of motion). We evaluated the association of early mobility and incident lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality by Cox proportional models adjusting for randomization and other co-variables.ResultsOf 1708 patients, only 85 (5.0%) had early mobility level 4–7 and 356 (20.8%) level 1–3, while 1267 (74.2%) had early mobility level 0. Patients with early mobility levels 4–7 and 1–3 had less illness severity, femoral central venous catheters, and organ support compared to patients with mobility level 0. Incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 1/85 (1.3%) patients in the early mobility 4–7 group, 7/348 (2.0%) patients in mobility 1–3 group, and 50/1230 (4.1%) patients in mobility 0 group. Compared with early mobility group 0, mobility groups 4–7 and 1–3 were not associated with differences in incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 8.90; p = 0.87 and 0.91, 95% CI 0.39, 2.12; p = 0.83, respectively). However, early mobility groups 4–7 and 1–3 had lower 90-day mortality (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 1.01; p = 0.052, and 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62; p < 0.0001, respectively).ConclusionsOnly a small proportion of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were mobilized early. Early mobility was associated with reduced mortality, but not with different incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. This association does not establish causality, and randomized controlled trials are required to assess whether and to what extent this association is modifiable.Trial registrationThe PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).

Accidental loss of guidewire during femoral central venous catheterization: A case report

Accidental loss of guidewire during femoral central venous catheterization: A case report

Emergent Large-Bore Central Venous Catheter Placement in Severely Thrombocytopenic Patients with Suspected Immune-Mediated Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura Is Safe and Effective

Introduction: Immune-mediated thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) is a progressive and nearly uniformly fatal disease if not suspected and managed with plasma exchange (PLEX). Initiation of PLEX requires placement of a large-bore central venous catheter (CVC) in a patient with severe thrombocytopenia where platelet transfusion is contraindicated except in the setting of life-threatening hemorrhage. We sought to determine the safety and complication rates of large-bore CVC placement in patients with suspected iTTP. Methods: The Parkland Health and Hospital System electronic medical record system was queried for ADAMTS13 labs from 7/2011 to 7/2021, identifying 1,371 ordered tests with 465 being ordered in the emergency department, observation, or inpatient setting. Sixty-eight patients had a large-bore CVC placed for PLEX with suspicion for iTTP. Characteristics of providers performing CVC placement were obtained via chart review. Records were reviewed for complications, including death, infection, thrombosis, bleeding, pneumothorax, or pressure ulcers. Minor bleeding complications were procedure site hematomas and self-limited episodes of bleeding requiring manual pressure. The only major complication was a hematoma that required intubation for airway protection. Categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test, while continuous variables were compared using the Wilcox rank sum test. Results: Of the 68 patients, the majority were Black or Hispanic (84%). Central venous catheter placement was most often performed by General Surgery (68%) followed by the Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU; 12%), Emergency Medicine (7%), and Nephrology (7%). Surgery and Emergency Medicine placed significantly more catheters in patients who ultimately had iTTP (P = 0.03). Resident physicians placed the majority of CVCs (79%) with no prophylactic blood products used in over 90% of cases. There was a 12% (8 out of 68) complication rate predominantly related to bleeding (n=7), although one patient had a pressure ulcer due to a lack of mobility after a femoral vein CVC placement. There was only one severe complication with the development of a rapidly expanding hematoma during an internal jugular (IJ) line placement causing airway compromise and requiring intubation. There were no differences in complication rates between line placement by General Surgery versus other services (P = 0.91) or with prophylactic platelet (P = 0.81), cryoprecipitate (P = 0.59), or FFP (P = 0.70) transfusions. A significant association was observed between the number of line attempts (median [IQR]) and complications (2 [2-4] v patients without complications: 1 [1-1], P < 0.001). In patients with iTTP, pre-procedural coagulation parameters had significantly lower platelets, lower INR, lower PT, and higher fibrinogen, suggesting a level of coagulopathy and/or disseminated intravascular coagulation in patients who were ultimately not found to have iTTP. Discussion: In a tertiary hospital, there was only one severe complication of large-bore CVC placement was observed in a cohort of 68 patients-most of whom had severe thrombocytopenia and did not receive prophylactic platelet or cryoprecipitate transfusions. Furthermore, resident physicians placed 79% of these CVCs without a significant increase in complication rate. Given that iTTP is a severe and progressive disease requiring emergent intervention, our findings suggest that CVC insertion for PLEX should not be delayed due to concerns regarding thrombocytopenia or bleeding complications. Most complications were minor bleeding or hematomas that resolved with pressure and observation. No significant difference in the rate of complications was observed when comparing surgical and non-surgical services. Conversely, there was an association between the number of CVC placement attempts and complications, suggesting that the line should be placed by whomever is qualified and available to expedite treatment. Figure 1View largeDownload PPTFigure 1View largeDownload PPT Close modal

Transient Complete Heart Block during Femoral Central Venous Catheter Placement in a Pediatric Patient: A Case Description and Literature Review

Highlights Abstract Femoral central venous catheter (CVC) placement is a common procedure performed in the pediatric intensive care unit. Femoral CVCs have a relatively low intraprocedural complication rate compared with other access sites. We describe a case of guidewire-induced transient complete heart block during femoral CVC insertion. This complication is rare in the pediatric population. The incidence of its occurrence and guidance to prevent this complication are discussed.

Manual Compression of External Iliac Vein to Increase the Size of Femoral Vein for Femoral Central Venous Catheter Insertion in Small Children: Pilot Experimental Study and Randomized Trial

Highlights Abstract Aim: Pediatric femoral central venous catheter insertion is sometimes difficult due to small vein size. External iliac vein (EIV) compression may provide a tourniquet effect to the femoral vein (FV) and may facilitate catheterization. This study was conducted to determine the effect of EIV compression on FV size and femoral venous catheterization success rates. Methods: This study had 2 parts. The first part was a single-arm experimental study. The second part was a randomized controlled trial. Children weighing 2.5–15.0 kg were included. First part: All patients received the same intervention and measurements. FV anteroposterior and medial-lateral diameters were measured by ultrasound without EIV compression, after which EIV was compressed using the assistant’s finger, and FV diameters were measured. Second part: Patients were randomized into compression and control groups. The compression group received EIV compression during femoral venous catheterization. The control group did not receive the compression. Results: A total of 30 patients (15 in each group) participated. EIV compression significantly increased FV anteroposterior diameter (3.36 ± 1.01 mm with compression, 2.39 ± 0.76 mm without compression, mean difference = 0.97 mm, 95% CI = 0.73, 1.21, P &amp;lt; 0.001) and medial-lateral diameter (4.58 ± 1.40 mm with compression, 3.86 ± 1.32 mm without compression, mean difference = 0.72 mm, 95% CI = 0.43, 1.01, P &amp;lt; 0.001). Catheterization success rates were not different between groups. Conclusions: EIV compression increased FV size, but the effect on femoral venous catheterization success rates was inconclusive due to a small sample size.

Lymphorrhea following Tunneled Femoral Central Venous Catheter Placement: Avoidance and Management of a Rare Complication.

Lymphatic injury and chylothorax are known, albeit rare, complications of both right and left internal jugular central venous catheter placement.[1] [2] Some reports suggest that these complications occur more frequently when lines are placed in the presence of other complicating factors such as infection or thrombosis.[3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Although rare, the potential for a peripheral lymphatic injury is present during vascular access adjacent to the inguinal nodal cluster. A case of iatrogenic peripheral lymphatic injury during placement of a femoral tunneled central venous catheter (TCVC) is described. We review peripheral lymphatic anatomy, suggest approaches to avoid inadvertent lymphatic injury, and discuss management strategies of a peripheral lymphatic injury.

Red blood cell exchange in children with sickle cell disease.

The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy of red blood cell exchange (RBCx) using a Spectra Optia® automated apheresis system in children with sickle cell disease (SCD). We used automated RBCx to treat acute and chronic complications in 75 children with SCD who had a median age of 10years [7-13]. We analyzed 649 RBCx sessions. Peripheral venous access was limited in a number of the children, and thus a femoral double-lumen central venous catheter was required. We recommend heparin locking with 500 units in each lumen of the catheter. To prevent complications, we ensured that all patients had achieved a post-RCE HbS level of < 30%. For chronic transfusion, with a post-RCE Hb level of approximately 10-11g/dL, a blood exchange volume of ≥ 32mL/kg, and an interval between each RBCx procedure of ≤ 30days, the residual HbS level was maintained below 30%. For acute transfusion, a post-exchange Hb level ≥ 10g/dL (p < 0.001) and a total exchange volume ≥ 35mL/kg (p = 0.001) were the best way to reduce HbS to < 30%. AUC was 0.84. Our results show that erythrocytapheresis was useful and safe for children with SCD.

Time-Driven Cost Analysis of Noncuffed Venous Catheter Placement in Infants: Bedside versus IR Suite

PurposeTo compare the direct bundled costs of interventional radiology (IR) suite versus bedside placement of noncuffed central venous catheters in infants. MethodsA single-center retrospective review was performed of all noncuffed upper extremity (peripherally inserted central venous catheter [PICC]) and tunneled femoral (tunneled femoral central venous catheter [TCVC]) catheters placed in infants between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. Propensity score matching was performed adjusting for age, birth weight, procedure weight, and catheter days. Process maps for each procedure were created based on location and sedation type. Technical success and complications were recorded for each placement. The total direct bundled cost for each catheter placement was calculated by summing the procedure and complication costs. ResultsA total of 142 procedures were performed on 126 matched patients with a technical success of 96% at the bedside and 100% in the IR suite (P = .08). The complication rates did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (P = .51). The total direct bundled costs for catheter placement were $1421.3 ± 2213.2 at the bedside and $2256.8 ± 3264.7 in the IR suite (P = .001). ConclusionsThe bundled cost of bedside femoral catheter placement is significantly less than that of fluoroscopic TCVC and PICC placement performed in the IR suite, mainly related to differences in sedation costs.

Central Venous Catheter-Related Infectious Complications in Pediatric Surgical Patients: A Single-Center Experience.

The purpose of this study was to estimate the rate of central venous catheter (CVC) colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) in pediatric surgical patients at our institute and to determine the various risk factors for their occurrence. The electronic medical records of 260 children undergoing surgery with simultaneous CVC insertion were retrospectively reviewed. Data on demographics, primary organ system involved, site of CVC, CVC dwell time, CVC colonization, CRBSI, and organisms isolated on culture were collated, categorized, and analyzed. The rate of CVC colonization and CRBSI was 32.8 per 1,000 catheter days (19.6%) and 17.4 per 1,000 catheter days (10.4%), respectively. Patients with CVC colonization and CRBSI had a significantly higher proportion of patients younger than 1 year of age ( p = 0.014). The CVC dwell time was significantly higher in both CVC colonization (7 [5-8] days) and CRBSI (6 [5-9] days) patients ( p = 0.005). The frequency of femoral catheterization was significantly higher in patients with CRBSI and CVC colonization ( p < 0.001). Coagulase negative staphylococcus was the commonest isolate in CVC infections. Age (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.87; p = 0.009), CVC dwell time (adjusted OR = 1.28; p = 0.003), and femoral CVC (adjusted OR = 9.61; p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for CRBSI. Conclusion: This study reveals important observations regarding the infectious complications of CVC in pediatric surgical patients. The rates of CVC colonization and CRBSI in this study were found to be higher as compared with previously reported rates in Western literature. However, these findings are significant in view of paucity of existing literature in pediatric surgical patients. In our study, higher risk of CRBSI was associated with younger age, increasing CVC dwell time, and femoral venous catheterization. We recommend strict compliance with CVC insertion and maintenance practices and adherence to CVC care bundles to minimize these serious complications.

Practice Patterns of Central Venous Catheter Placement and Confirmation in Pediatric Critical Care.

Optimal practices for the placement of central venous catheters (CVCs) in critically ill children are unclear. This study describes the clinical practice of pediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) providers regarding CVC placement, including site selection, confirmation practices and assessment of complications. Two-hundred fourteen PCCM providers responded to an electronic survey, including 170 (79%) attending physicians, 30 (14%) fellow physicians, and 14 (7%) advanced practice providers. PCCM providers most commonly place internal jugular (IJ) and femoral CVCs, with subclavian CVCs and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) placed less commonly (IJ 99%, femoral 95%, subclavian 40%, PICC 19%). The IJ is the most preferred site (128/214 (60%)); decreased infection risk is the most common reason for preferring this site. The subclavian is the least preferred site (150/214 [70%]) due to concern for increased risk of complications (51%) and personal discomfort with the procedure (49%). One-hundred twenty-six (59%) of respondents reported receiving formal ultrasound (US) or echocardiography training. Respondents reported using dynamic US guidance for placement in 90% of IJ, 86% of PICC, 78% of femoral, and 12% of subclavian CVCs. Plain radiography (X-ray) was the most preferred modality for confirming CVC tip position (85%) compared with US (9%) and no imaging (5%). Most providers reported using X-ray to evaluate for pneumothorax following upper extremity CVC placement, with only 5% reporting use of US and none relying on physical exam alone. This study demonstrates wide variability in PCCM providers' CVC placement practices. Potential training gaps exist for placement of subclavian catheters and use of US.