Cargando…

Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study

PURPOSE: Proper fixation of central venous catheters (CVCs) is an integral part of safety to avoid dislodgement and malfunction. However, the effectiveness of different CVC securement sutures is unknown. METHODS: Analysis of maximum dislodgement forces for CVCs from three different manufacturers usi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Struck, Manuel Florian, Friedrich, Lars, Schleifenbaum, Stefan, Kirsten, Holger, Schummer, Wolfram, Winkler, Bernd E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6742355/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31513685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222463
_version_ 1783451095558782976
author Struck, Manuel Florian
Friedrich, Lars
Schleifenbaum, Stefan
Kirsten, Holger
Schummer, Wolfram
Winkler, Bernd E.
author_facet Struck, Manuel Florian
Friedrich, Lars
Schleifenbaum, Stefan
Kirsten, Holger
Schummer, Wolfram
Winkler, Bernd E.
author_sort Struck, Manuel Florian
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Proper fixation of central venous catheters (CVCs) is an integral part of safety to avoid dislodgement and malfunction. However, the effectiveness of different CVC securement sutures is unknown. METHODS: Analysis of maximum dislodgement forces for CVCs from three different manufacturers using four different suture techniques in an in vitro tensile loading experiment: 1. “clamp only”, 2. “clamp and compression suture”, 3. “finger trap” and 4. “complete”, i.e., “clamp + compression suture + finger trap”. Twenty-five tests were performed for each of the three CVC models and four securement suture techniques (n = 300 test runs). RESULTS: The primary cause of catheter dislodgement was sliding through the clamp in techniques 1 and 2. In contrast, rupture of the suture was the predominant cause for dislodgement in techniques 2 and 3. Median (IQR 25–75%) dislodgement forces were 26.0 (16.6) N in technique 1, 26.5 (18.8) N in technique 2, 76.7 (18.7) N in technique 3, and 84.8 (11.8) N in technique 4. Post-hoc analysis demonstrated significant differences (P < .001) between all pairwise combinations of techniques except technique 1 vs. 2 (P = .98). CONCLUSIONS: “Finger trap” fixation at the segmentation site considerably increases forces required for dislodgement compared to clamp-based approaches.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6742355
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67423552019-09-20 Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study Struck, Manuel Florian Friedrich, Lars Schleifenbaum, Stefan Kirsten, Holger Schummer, Wolfram Winkler, Bernd E. PLoS One Research Article PURPOSE: Proper fixation of central venous catheters (CVCs) is an integral part of safety to avoid dislodgement and malfunction. However, the effectiveness of different CVC securement sutures is unknown. METHODS: Analysis of maximum dislodgement forces for CVCs from three different manufacturers using four different suture techniques in an in vitro tensile loading experiment: 1. “clamp only”, 2. “clamp and compression suture”, 3. “finger trap” and 4. “complete”, i.e., “clamp + compression suture + finger trap”. Twenty-five tests were performed for each of the three CVC models and four securement suture techniques (n = 300 test runs). RESULTS: The primary cause of catheter dislodgement was sliding through the clamp in techniques 1 and 2. In contrast, rupture of the suture was the predominant cause for dislodgement in techniques 2 and 3. Median (IQR 25–75%) dislodgement forces were 26.0 (16.6) N in technique 1, 26.5 (18.8) N in technique 2, 76.7 (18.7) N in technique 3, and 84.8 (11.8) N in technique 4. Post-hoc analysis demonstrated significant differences (P < .001) between all pairwise combinations of techniques except technique 1 vs. 2 (P = .98). CONCLUSIONS: “Finger trap” fixation at the segmentation site considerably increases forces required for dislodgement compared to clamp-based approaches. Public Library of Science 2019-09-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6742355/ /pubmed/31513685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222463 Text en © 2019 Struck et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Struck, Manuel Florian
Friedrich, Lars
Schleifenbaum, Stefan
Kirsten, Holger
Schummer, Wolfram
Winkler, Bernd E.
Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study
title Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study
title_full Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study
title_fullStr Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study
title_short Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study
title_sort effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: an in vitro crossover study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6742355/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31513685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222463
work_keys_str_mv AT struckmanuelflorian effectivenessofdifferentcentralvenouscatheterfixationsuturetechniquesaninvitrocrossoverstudy
AT friedrichlars effectivenessofdifferentcentralvenouscatheterfixationsuturetechniquesaninvitrocrossoverstudy
AT schleifenbaumstefan effectivenessofdifferentcentralvenouscatheterfixationsuturetechniquesaninvitrocrossoverstudy
AT kirstenholger effectivenessofdifferentcentralvenouscatheterfixationsuturetechniquesaninvitrocrossoverstudy
AT schummerwolfram effectivenessofdifferentcentralvenouscatheterfixationsuturetechniquesaninvitrocrossoverstudy
AT winklerbernde effectivenessofdifferentcentralvenouscatheterfixationsuturetechniquesaninvitrocrossoverstudy