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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |