Analysis of complications associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Prospective observational study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.3352Keywords:
Vascular Access, Nursing Team, Oncology, Hematology, TreatmentAbstract
Highlights
- There is a need to create standardized strategies for unified vascular access care in critical patients to reduce complications.
- Creating specialist teams, such as vascular access teams (VATs), allows a clear improvement in vascular access device care, reducing complications.
- The prevalence of complications such as thrombosis and infection has been low.
- Conducting new studies to evaluate and detect the leading causes and reasons for complications, such as accidental removal, would be advisable.
Introduction: Vascular access teams often use guidelines or algorithms to determine the most appropriate vascular access device based on the patient's condition and the substance to be infused. These guidelines are intended to help identify the most qualified personnel for device insertion, but few studies collect information on the performance of these units. Objective: This study aims to identify the evolution and complication rate of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in patients requiring vascular access. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted over three years. Continuous variables with normal distribution were compared using Student's t-test. Nonparametrically distributed variables were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test. For categorical variables, the two-tailed chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used. Regression analysis was performed for the dependent variable of complications. Results: Of the PICCs inserted, 61.99% (566) were in patients receiving oncologic treatment, with a mean dwell time of 136±127.51 days. PICCs inserted in hematologic patients had a mean dwell time of 144±141.3 days (p=0.438). The most frequent complications were accidental removal (3.50%, 32, OR 0.581), thrombosis (3%, 27, OR 0.752), and central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) (2.10%, 19, OR, 0.113). Discussion: Complications related to PICCs were infrequent, with thrombosis being the most prevalent. Accidental removal was also frequent, a complication not thoroughly analyzed in other studies. Conclusions: PICC insertion and management by vascular access teams enables units to achieve a low complication rate in onco-hematological patients.
How to cite this article: Ferraz-Torres Marta, Diez-Revilla Ana, Plaza-Unzue Ruth, Corcuera-Martinez Maria Inés. Analysis of complications associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Prospective observational study. Revista Cuidarte. 2024;15(3):e3352. https://doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.3352
References
Cotogni P, Barbero C, Garrino C, Degiorgis C, Mussa B, De Francesco A, et al. Peripherally inserted central catheters in non-hospitalized cancer patients: 5-year results of a prospective study. Support Care Cancer. 2015;23:403–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-014-2387-9
Alexandrou E, Ray-Barruel G, Carr PJ, Frost SA, Inwood S, Higgins N, et al. OMG Study Group. Use of short peripheral intravenous catheters: characteristics, management, and outcomes worldwide. J Hosp Med. 2018;13(5):e1-e7. https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.3039
Schults JA, Kleidon T, Petsky HL, Stone R, Schoutrop J, Ullman AJ. Peripherally inserted central catheter design and material for reducing catheter failure and complications. Cochrane Database Syst 2019. 3; 2019 (7):CD013366 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013366
Marsh N, Webster J, Larsen E, Genzel J, Cooke M, Mihala G, et al. Expert versus generalist inserters for peripheral intravenous catheter insertion: a pilot randomize controlled trial. Trials. 2018;19(1):564. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2946-3
Ferraz-Torres M, Mañeru-Oria A, Corcuera-Martinez MI, Diez-Revilla A, Aldonza-Torres M, Escobedo-Romero RL et al. Implantación de una unidad de terapia intravenosa. Una realidad en marcha. Rol enfermería. 2018;41(9):568-576. https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/portal/resource/pt/ibc-179697
Carr PJ, Moureau NL. Specialized Vascular Access Teams. In: Moureau, N. (eds) Vessel Health and Preservation: The Right Approach for Vascular Access. Springer, Cham. 2019.
Cortés Rey N, Pinelli F, van Loon FHJ, Caguioa J, Munoz Mozas G, Piriou V, et al. The state of vascular access teams: Results of a European survey. Int J Clin Pract. 2021;75(12):e14849. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.14849
Carr PJ, Higgins NS, Cooke ML, Mihala G, Rickard CM. Vascular access specialist teams for device insertion and prevention of failure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;(3):CD011429. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd011429.pub2
Corcuera Martínez MI, Aldonza Torres M, Díez Revilla AM, Maali Centeno S, Mañeru Oria A, Elizari Roncal I, et al. Impact assessment following implementation of a vascular access team. J Vasc Access. 2022;23(1):135-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1129729820984284
Pan L, Zhao Q, Yang X. Risk factors for venous thrombosis associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014; 7(12): 5814-5844. . https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4307559/
Chopra V, Kaatz S, Conlon A, Paje D, Grant PJ, Rogers MAM, et al. The Michigan Risk Score to predict peripherally inserted central catheter-associated thrombosis. J Thromb Haemost. 2017;15(10):1951-1962. https://doi.org/10.1111/jth.13794
Mielke D, Wittig A, Teichgräber U. Peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) in outpatient and inpatient oncological treatment. Support Care Cancer. 2020; 28(10):4753-4760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-019-05276-0
Scrivens N, Sabri E, Bredeson C, McDiarmid S. Comparison of complication rates and incidences associated with different peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) in patients with hematological malignancies: a retrospective cohort study. Leuk Lymphoma. 2020;61(1):156-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/10428194.2019.1646908
Olaechea PM, Álvarez-Lerma F, Palomar M, Gimeno R, Gracia MP, Mas N,et al. ENVIN-HELICS Study Group. Characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted to Spanish ICU: A prospective observational study from the ENVIN-HELICS registry (2006-2011). Med Intensiva. 2016;40(4):216-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medin.2015.07.003
Hitchcock J, Haigh DA, Martin N, Davies S. Preventing medical adhesive-related skin injury (MARSI). Br J Nurs. 2021;30(15):S48-S56. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2021.30.15.s48
Wohlwend B. Regression Model Evaluation Metrics: R-Squared, Adjusted R-Squared, MSE, RMSE, and MAE. 2023.2:1-4. https://medium.com/@brandon93.w/regression-model-evaluation-metrics-r-squared-adjusted-r-squared-mse-rmse-and-mae-24dcc0e4cbd3
Ferraz-Torres M, Diez-Revilla A, Plaza-Unzue R, Corcuera-Martinez MI. “Analysis of complications associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Prospective observational study”, Mendeley Data. 2024. V1. https://doi.org/10.17632/npymmmcng5.1
Pan L, Zhao Q, Yang X. Risk factors for venous thrombosis associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014;7(12): 5814-5844. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4307559/
Tatsuno, K., Ikeda, M., Wakabayashi, Y. Clinical Features of Bloodstream Infections Associated with Peripheral Versus Central Venous Catheters. Infect Dis Ther.2019;8:343–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-019-00257-6
Chan RJ, Northfield S, Larsen E, Mihala G, Ullman A, Hancock P, et al. Central venous Access device SeCurement And Dressing Effectiveness for peripherally inserted central catheters in adult acute hospital patients (CASCADE): a pilot randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2017;18(1):458. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2207-x
Goossens, Godelieve A., Grumiaux N., Janssens C., Jérôme M, Fieuws S, et al. "SecurAstaP trial: securement with SecurAcath versus StatLock for peripherally inserted central catheters, a randomised open trial." BMJ open. 2018;8(2):e016058. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016058
Buetti N, Ruckly S, Schwebel C, Mimoz O, Souweine B, Lucet JC, et al. Chlorhexidine-impregnated sponge versus chlorhexidine gel dressing for short-term intravascular catheters: which one is better? Crit Care. 2020;24(1):458. https://doi.org/10.1186%2Fs13054-020-03174-0
Mimoz O, Lucet JC, Kerforne T, Pascal J, Souweine B, Goudet V,et al. Skin antisepsis with chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone iodine-alcohol, with and without skin scrubbing, for prevention of intravascular-catheter-related infection (CLEAN): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, two-by-two factorial trial. Lancet. 2015;386(10008):2069-2077. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(15)00244-5
Gavin NC, Webster J, Chan RJ, Rickard CM. Frequency of dressing changes for central venous access devices on catheter‐related infections. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016;(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd009213.pub2
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
Altmetrics
Downloads
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Revista Cuidarte
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Journal Cuidarte, scientific publication of open access, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC), which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Any other form of use such as reproduction, transformation, public communication or distribution, for profit, requires the prior authorization of the University of Santander UDES.
The names and e-mail addresses entered in the Journal Cuidarte will be used exclusively for the purposes stated by this magazine and will not be available for any other purpose or other person.
The articles published in the Journal Cuidarte represent the criteria of their authors and do not necessarily constitute the official opinion of the University of Santander UDES.
