Incidence Of Catheter Malfunction Research Articles

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.

Does Laparoscopic Omentectomy Reduce CAPD Catheter Malfunction: A Three-arm Pilot Randomized Trial.

Introduction:Catheter malfunction secondary to omental wrapping is a frequent complication of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). Of the various methods of peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion (PDCI), open surgical insertion under local anesthesia is most widely practiced. Laparoscopic omentectomy is often undertaken as a salvage procedure in case of malfunctioning catheters. However, there is no randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the role of prophylactic laparoscopic omentectomy on catheter function. This pilot RCT was undertaken to evaluate the impact of laparoscopic omentectomy on the incidence of catheter malfunction.Materials and Methods:Consecutive patients were randomized into three groups: laparoscopic PDCI with omentectomy (Group A), laparoscopic PDCI without omentectomy (Group B) and open surgical PDCI (Group C). The primary outcome was the incidence of catheter malfunction at 6 weeks and 3 months.Results:Forty-one patients completed follow-up, with 16, 11, and 14 patients in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. Incidence of catheter malfunction was 6.2%, 27.3%, and 14.3% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively, at 6 weeks and 6.2%, 36.4%, and 21.4% at 3 months, respectively. In patients with previously failed catheter insertion (n = 23), malfunction at 3 months was 8.3% (1/12) in patients who had omentectomy, compared with 45.5% (5/11) in those who did not (P = 0.069). Operating time was significantly higher (P < 0.001) in Group A.Conclusions:Laparoscopic omentectomy may be associated with a lower incidence of catheter malfunction, especially in patients with previously failed peritoneal dialysis catheter. Data from this pilot RCT can be used to design a large trial with an adequate number of patients.

Substitution of citrate with tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) for catheter lock does not improve patency of tunnelled haemodialysis catheters in a randomised trial

BackroundThe study aim was to establish if substitution of citrate with rt-PA for catheter lock once weekly can reduce the incidence of catheter-related blood stream infections (CR-BSI) or improve patency of tunneled haemodialysis catheters.MethodsAll incident patients undergoing insertion of a tunneled haemodialysis catheter were screened and included except those suffering infection or using oral anticoagulation. Study participants were randomized into two arms according to the solution applied as catheter lock: receiving either trisodium citrate (Citra-LockTM 4%) only or rt-PA (Actilyse® 1 mg/ml) on the middle session each week with citrate used on the first and third sessions. The incidence of CR-BSI (confirmed by positive blood culture), catheter non-function (complete obstruction), and malfunction (blood flow < 250 ml/min) was recorded. Statistical significance was tested with ANOVA, post hoc analysis was performed by means of multiple linear regression.ResultsTotally, 18 patients were included and followed during 655 haemodialysis sessions. No episode of CR-BSI was detected while 6 catheter non-functions (0.9% sessions) and 101 malfunctions (15.4% sessions) were recorded. The incidence of both events was equal between the study arms: 4 non-functions and 55 malfunctions in the rt-PA arm and 2 non-functions and 46 malfunctions in the citrate arm (p = 0.47 and p = 0.24, respectively). Additionally, the mean blood flow achieved did not differ significantly between the arms: 326 ± 1,8 and 326 ± 1,9 ml/min (p = 0.95) in rt-PA and citrate arms, respectively. Post hoc analysis identified time elapsed since previous session (β = 0.12, p = 0.005) and malfunction on previous session (β = 0.25, p < 0.001) as significant factors affecting the occurrence of malfunction. By contrast, the study arm, rt-PA application on previous session, and catheter vintage did not enter the model.ConclusionSubstitution of citrate with rt-PA for catheter lock does not reduce the incidence of catheter malfunction neither does it affect the blood flow achieved during haemodialysis. Catheter patency is related rather to the time interval between sessions and to previous malfunction (thus probably reflecting undefined individual factors). The incidence of CR-BSI within pre-selected haemodialysis population is sporadic (less than 1 per 4.3 patient years in our sample).Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12612000152820. Retrospectively registered 03/02/2012.

The influence of sealing tube with urokinase on the malfunction of central venous catheter with Dacron ring

Objective To explore the effect of sealing tube with regular urokinase for the malfunction of central venous catheter(CVC) in patients with hemodialysis (HD).Methods This was a prospective randomized controlled study,132 HD patients with cuff CVC were studied.In the early stage,52 H D patients without 80 patients with regular catheter-locking solution of urokinase.To analyze effect of cuff CVC malfunction,blood flow(BF),dialysis adequacy,anemia and serum albumin (ALB) with regular catheter-locking solution of urokinase.The incidence of catheter malfunction was calculated based on the catheter dysfunction in the first 3 months.Clinical index was measured,recorded BF and calculated urea clearance rate (Kt/V).Results HD patients catheter-locking solution with regular urokinase could reduce the incidence of dialysis catheter malfunction ( 26.3％ vs 32.7％,x2 =32.727,P ＜0.01 ),increase the BF,Kt/V,levels of hemoglobin(HGB) and ALB(P＜0.05 or P ＜0.01).Conclusion Regular catheter-locking solution with urokinase is effective in reducing HD patients incidence of dialysis CVC malfunction,increasing patients BF,dialysis adequacy and the level of ALB,improving anemia. Key words: Renal dialysis; Central venous catheter; Malfunction; Urokinase

Peripherally inserted central catheters revisited

Background: This study compares central venous catheters (CVC) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) for indications for insertion, complications, and economic impact. Methods: A retrospective review of 838 (283 CVC, 555 PICC) consecutively placed venous catheters reflected 49,365 CVC and 11,814 PICC days. Results: There were 57 (20%) complications in the CVC group, 197 (35%) complications in the PICC group. PICC were associated with a statistically significant increase in the incidence of catheter malfunction ( P = 0.0005), arm vein phlebitis ( P = 0.0004), and overall complications ( P = 0.00001). A higher complication rate was noted in PICC inserted for chemotherapy ( P = 0.00001) and parenteral hyperalimentation administration ( P = 0.04). Charges for inpatient insertion of PICC and CVC were $500 and $2,500, respectively. Conclusions: PICC have a significantly higher complication rate than CVC. PICC provide cost-effective central access of 2 to 3 weeks’ duration, reserving operatively placed CVC for longer access requirements.

Central venous catheters — State of the art

Background: This study compares central venous catheters (CVC) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) for indications for insertion, complications, and economic impact.Methods: A retrospective review of 838 (283 CVC, 555 PICC) consecutively placed venous catheters reflected 49,365 CVC and 11,814 PICC days.Results: There were 57 (20%) complications in the CVC group, 197 (35%) complications in the PICC group. PICC were associated with a statistically significant increase in the incidence of catheter malfunction (P = 0.0005), arm vein phlebitis (P = 0.0004), and overall complications (P = 0.00001). A higher complication rate was noted in PICC inserted for chemotherapy (P = 0.00001) and parenteral hyperalimentation administration (P = 0.04). Charges for inpatient insertion of PICC and CVC were $500 and $2,500, respectively.Conclusions: PICC have a significantly higher complication rate than CVC. PICC provide cost-effective central access of 2 to 3 weeks’ duration, reserving operatively placed CVC for longer access requirements.