Cargando…
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 t...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6714901/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30909723 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029619839150 |
_version_ | 1783447141347229696 |
---|---|
author | Bahl, Amit Karabon, Patrick Chu, David |
author_facet | Bahl, Amit Karabon, Patrick Chu, David |
author_sort | Bahl, Amit |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6714901 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67149012019-09-04 Comparison of Venous Thrombosis Complications in Midlines Versus Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: Are Midlines the Safer Option? Bahl, Amit Karabon, Patrick Chu, David Clin Appl Thromb Hemost Original Article 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. SAGE Publications 2019-03-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6714901/ /pubmed/30909723 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029619839150 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Bahl, Amit Karabon, Patrick Chu, David Comparison of Venous Thrombosis Complications in Midlines Versus Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: Are Midlines the Safer Option? |
title | Comparison of Venous Thrombosis Complications in Midlines Versus Peripherally
Inserted Central Catheters: Are Midlines the Safer Option? |
title_full | Comparison of Venous Thrombosis Complications in Midlines Versus Peripherally
Inserted Central Catheters: Are Midlines the Safer Option? |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Venous Thrombosis Complications in Midlines Versus Peripherally
Inserted Central Catheters: Are Midlines the Safer Option? |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Venous Thrombosis Complications in Midlines Versus Peripherally
Inserted Central Catheters: Are Midlines the Safer Option? |
title_short | Comparison of Venous Thrombosis Complications in Midlines Versus Peripherally
Inserted Central Catheters: Are Midlines the Safer Option? |
title_sort | comparison of venous thrombosis complications in midlines versus peripherally
inserted central catheters: are midlines the safer option? |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6714901/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30909723 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1076029619839150 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bahlamit comparisonofvenousthrombosiscomplicationsinmidlinesversusperipherallyinsertedcentralcathetersaremidlinesthesaferoption AT karabonpatrick comparisonofvenousthrombosiscomplicationsinmidlinesversusperipherallyinsertedcentralcathetersaremidlinesthesaferoption AT chudavid comparisonofvenousthrombosiscomplicationsinmidlinesversusperipherallyinsertedcentralcathetersaremidlinesthesaferoption |