Prediction of Extended Period of Vasopressor Infusion Requiring Central Venous Catheterisation: A Burning Issue in Critical Care

Zhongheng Zhang,Leo Anthony Celi,Kwok M. Ho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057x211030927

2021-01-01

Abstract:Vasopressor infusion is one of the most important interventions in the critical care setting, especially for patients with circulatory failure...

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Safety and efficacy of peripheral versus centrally administered vasopressor infusion: A single-centre retrospective observational study

Annaliese Stolz,Rachel Efendy,Yogesh Apte,Alison Craswell,Frances Lin,Mahesh Ramanan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aucc.2021.08.005

IF: 3.265

2021-09-01

Australian Critical Care

Abstract:BackgroundShock affects one-third of patients admitted to intensive care and is associated with increased mortality. Vasopressor medications are used to maintain blood pressure in shock. Central venous catheters are associated with serious complications and pose logistical difficulties for insertion. Delivery of vasopressors via peripheral intravenous cannula may be a safe alternative.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study comparing safety profile and outcomes of vasopressor delivery via peripheral and central routes in critically ill patients over a 12-month period in a mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit. Demographics, clinical characteristics, treatments, and safety outcome data were extracted from medical records. Patients were classified into three groups: vasopressor infusions via peripheral intravenous cannula, combined peripheral intravenous cannula followed by central venous catheter, and central venous catheter only. Groups were compared using the Kruskal–Wallis test for continuous variables and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. The impact of duration of vasopressor infusion on complication rates was assessed using logistic regression.ResultsWe identified 212 patients who received vasopressor infusion, 39 received via peripheral only (Group 1), 155 via peripheral followed by central (Group 2), and 18 via central only (Group 3). There were some baseline differences between groups. Group 1 had the lowest median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score (64, interquartile range = 44–77), and Group 3, the highest (86, interquartile range = 57–101). Duration of vasopressor infusion was shortest in Group 1 and longer in Groups 2 and 3. There were no major complications; however, minor complications such as leakage, extravasation, and erythema occurred in 41% of Group 1 and 28% of Group 2 patients. Duration of peripheral vasopressor infusion was not associated with an increased risk of complications.ConclusionsAdministration of vasopressor infusions for short duration in critically ill patients via a peripheral venous cannula may be feasible, with low rates of complications, and offers a safe alternative to central venous access.
Clinical practice guidelines for the management of central venous catheter for critically ill patients

Zhongheng Zhang,Claudia Brusasco,Antonio Anile,Francesco Corradi,Maryanne Mariyaselvam,Peter Young,Yaniv Almog,Bin Du,Xuezhong Yu,Huadong Zhu,Mao Zhang,Yu Cao,Yucai Hong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jeccm.2018.05.05

2018-01-01

Abstract:The objective of this article is to provide a guideline for the management of central venous catheter for critically ill patients. Electronic databases of CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, four Chinese databases (CBM, WANFANG DATA, CAJD, VIP Database) and Google Scholar were searched from inception to August 2017. The reviewers assessed each included study for the risk of bias under the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The GRADE evidence profile tables were added to each important clinical outcome. The guideline will be updated in a 5-year interval by incorporating new evidence. The guideline panel provided 11 statements on the management of central venous catheter for critically ill patients. Overall, there were 4 strong recommendations, and 7 weak recommendations. They were as follows:(I) we commend the use of catheter impregnation to prevent catheterrelated blood stream infection (1A);(II) we suggest the use of real-time ultrasound guidance for subclavian or femoral vein insertion (2B), and recommend that for internal jugular vein (1A);(III) we suggest the use of realtime color Doppler ultrasound guidance on central venous catheterization for adult and pediatric patients (2C);(IV) we suggest not to use heparin for the maintenance of CVC patency (2A);(V) we suggest the use contrastenhanced ultrasound for the confirmation of central venous catheter placement (2B);(VI) we recommend the use of bedside ultrasound together with agitated or non-agitated normal saline to confirm CVC position (1C);(VII) we suggest to use subclavian site for CVC insertion (2C);(VIII) we …
The development of a nurse-driven protocol for the safe administration of vasopressors through peripheral intravenous catheters

Laura Padrone,Janet Galiczewski,Bernadette Amitrano,Seth Koenig,Mangala Narasimhan,Paul H. Mayo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/ijh.v4n1p36

2018-03-08

International Journal of Healthcare

Abstract:Aim: The purpose of this quality improvement project was to develop a nurse-driven protocol to provide a safer, quicker, and less complication-prone alternative for the administration of vasopressors.Background: The use of vasopressor medication is a common life saving intervention used to achieve hemodynamic stability in critically ill patients. Vasopressor infusions are routinely administered through central venous catheters (CVC) for fear that extravasation into subcutaneous tissue will result in ischemic injury. There are many potential complications of obtaining central venous access for vasopressor use, including pneumothoraces, arterial punctures and hematomas.Design: Quality improvement project.Methods: An interdisciplinary team developed a written protocol for the administration of vasopressors through peripheral intravenous (PIV) catheters based on the available scientific evidence. Key components of this quality improvement project were patient safety, a team approach and skilled monitoring of the infusion site. Critical care nurses were responsible for the line insertion, maintenance and identification of possible extravasation. All catheters placed were confirmed by ultrasonography and if extravasation of medication was suspected, the extravasation protocol was followed without delay.Results: The protocol developed was utilized in a study by Cardenas-Garcia et al. (2015). Extravasation occurred in 19 of 734 patients (2%) without any tissue injury following the use of the extravasation protocol. This evidence-based protocol for peripherally administered vasopressors decreased central line use and the potential complications from the placement of CVCs. Strict adherence to this evidence-based nurse-driven protocol was essential for the safe administration of vasopressors via PIV access.Conclusion/Clinical relevance: Peripheral administration of vasopressors has many beneficial implications for nursing practice. A nurse-driven protocol for peripheral vasopressors can eliminate the need for CVCs, which will reduce the incidence of central line-associated blood stream infections and decrease the number of central line days. This also may eliminate potential complications from CVC placement. Lastly, peripherally administered vasopressors may prevent a delay in treatment often experienced with placement of a central line.
Randomised, controlled, feasibility trial comparing vasopressor infusion administered via peripheral cannula versus central venous catheter for critically ill adults: A study protocol

Stacey Watts,Yogesh Apte,Thomas Holland,April Hatt,Alison Craswell,Frances Lin,Alexis Tabah,Robert Ware,Joshua Byrnes,Christopher Anstey,Gerben Keijzers,Mahesh Ramanan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295347

IF: 3.7

2024-05-13

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Background: When clinicians need to administer a vasopressor infusion, they are faced with the choice of administration via either peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) or central venous catheter (CVC). Vasopressor infusions have traditionally been administered via central venous catheters (CVC) rather than Peripheral Intra Venous Catheters (PIVC), primarily due to concerns of extravasation and resultant tissue injury. This practice is not guided by contemporary randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence. Observational data suggests safety of vasopressor infusion via PIVC. To address this evidence gap, we have designed the "Vasopressors Infused via Peripheral or Central Access" (VIPCA) RCT. Methods: The VIPCA trial is a single-centre, feasibility, parallel-group RCT. Eligible critically ill patients requiring a vasopressor infusion will be identified by emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU) staff and randomised to receive vasopressor infusion via either PIVC or CVC. Primary outcome is feasibility, a composite of recruitment rate, proportion of eligible patients randomised, protocol fidelity, retention and missing data. Primary clinical outcome is days alive and out of hospital up to day-30. Secondary outcomes will include safety and other clinical outcomes, and process and cost measures. Specific aspects of safety related to vasopressor infusions such as extravasation, leakage, device failure, tissue injury and infection will be assessed. Discussion: VIPCA is a feasibility RCT whose outcomes will inform the feasibility and design of a multicentre Phase-3 trial comparing routes of vasopressor delivery. The exploratory economic analysis will provide input data for the full health economic analysis which will accompany any future Phase-3 RCT.
Use of continuous infusion technique with pre-filled elastic pumps for prevention of centrally inserted central catheter occlusion in critically ill patients: A feasibility study

Wei Jia,Kaiping Wu,Kaifei Song,Wenjuan Yun,Jin Wang,Yaping Yi,Lingyun Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000040930

IF: 1.6

2024-12-18

Medicine

Abstract:In the intensive care unit (ICU), approximately 50% of patients require a central venous access device for hemodynamic monitoring, blood transfusion or massive rapid rehydration. [ 1 ] Centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs) have emerged as the preferred choice for in-hospital use at most facilities, mainly because of its low cost. [ 2 ] However, critically ill patients are at risk for catheter occlusion due to factors related to their abnormal coagulation systems and their complex medical needs.

medicine, general & internal
Peripheral Intravenous Administration of High-Risk Infusions in Critical Care: A Risk-Benefit Analysis

Barb Nickel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4037/ccn2019443

2019-12-01

Abstract:In critical care, the short peripheral intravenous catheter is an essential venous access route, often used in emergency situations to administer high-risk medications and fluid resuscitation. This route of administration is generally viewed as routine and benign. However, a growing body of evidence indicates that the risks inherent to this route are much higher than reported and represent a significant area of patient harm. Few standardized definitions and surveillance methods exist for peripheral intravenous catheter-related complications such as phlebitis, bloodstream infection, and extravasation. Recommendations for peripheral intravenous catheter replacement are based on clinical indications rather than routine replacement, so standards of practice for catheter insertion and management must be consistently applied. This article reviews recent studies that challenge the need for central catheter placement for vasopressor therapy, current knowledge of peripheral intravenous catheter-related adverse events, and evidence-based standards of care for short peripheral intravenous catheter insertion and maintenance.
Complication of vasopressor infusion through peripheral venous catheter: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Quincy K. Tran,Gaurika Mester,Vera Bzhilyanskaya,Leenah Z. Afridi,Sanketh Andhavarapu,Zain Alam,Austin Widjaja,Brooke Andersen,Ann Matta,Ali Pourmand

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2020.09.047

IF: 3.6

2020-11-01

The American Journal of Emergency Medicine

Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background</h3><p>Vasopressors are mainstay treatment for patients in shock and are usually infused through central venous catheters (CVCs). However, CVCs are associated with risk of infection or delay from the needs of confirmation of placement. Infusing vasopressor through peripheral venous catheter (PIVs) could be an alternative in the Emergency Departments (ED) but data regarding complications is inconclusive. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis to assess literature involving prevalence of complications from infusing vasopressors via PIVs.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Methods</h3><p>We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus databases from beginnings to 02/02/2020 to identify relevant randomized control trials, cohort, case-control studies. We excluded case reports. Authors assessed studies' quality with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Kappa score was used to assess interrater agreement. Outcome was complications as direct results from infusing vasopressors through PIVs.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Results</h3><p>We identified 325 articles and included 9 studies after reviewing 16 full text articles. Our analysis included 1835 patients whose mean age was 63 (Standard Deviation 12) years and 48% was female. There were 122 (7%) complications, of which 117 (96%) were minor. The meta-analysis with random effects showed the pooled prevalence of complications as 0.086 (95%CI 0.031–0.21). Studies reporting infusion safety guidelines had significantly lower prevalence of complications (0.029, 95%CI 0.018–0.045), compared to those not reporting a safety guideline (0.12, 95%CI 0.038–0.30, <em>p</em> = 0.024).</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusion</h3><p>There was low prevalence of complications as a direct result from infusing vasopressors through PIVs. Studies with safety guidelines were associated with significantly lower prevalence of complications. Further studies are needed to confirm our observations.</p>
Complications from Administration of Vasopressors Through Peripheral Venous Catheters: An Observational Study

Kamal Medlej,Amin Antoine Kazzi,Ahel El Hajj Chehade,Mothana Saad Eldine,Ali Chami,Rana Bachir,Dina Zebian,Gilbert Abou Dagher

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2017.09.007

Abstract:Background: The placement of a central venous catheter for the administration of vasopressors is still recommended and required by many institutions because of concern about complications associated with peripheral administration of vasopressors. Objective: Our aim was to determine the incidence of complications from the administration of vasopressors through peripheral venous catheters (PVC) in patients with circulatory shock, and to identify the factors associated with these complications. Methods: This was a prospective, observational study conducted in the emergency department (ED) of a tertiary care medical center. Patients presenting to the ED with circulatory shock and in whom a vasopressor was started through a PVC were included. Research fellows examined the i.v. access site for complications twice daily during the period of peripheral vasopressor administration, then daily up to 48 h after treatment discontinuation or until the patient expired. Results: Of the 55 patients that were recruited, 3 (5.45% overall, 6% of patients receiving norepinephrine) developed complications; none were major. Two developed local extravasation and one developed local thrombophlebitis. All three complications occurred during the vasopressor infusion, none in the 48 h after discontinuation, and none required any medical or surgical intervention. Two of the three complications occurred in the hand, and all occurred in patients receiving norepinephrine and with 20-gauge catheters. Conclusions: The incidence of complications from the administration of vasopressors through a PVC is small and did not result in significant morbidity in this study. Larger prospective studies are needed to better determine the factors that are associated with these complications, and identify patients in whom this practice is safe.
Safety of peripheral administration of vasopressor medications: A systematic review

David H Tian,Claire Smyth,Gerben Keijzers,Stephen Pj Macdonald,Sandra Peake,Andrew Udy,Anthony Delaney

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.13406

Abstract:Objective: Vasopressor medications have traditionally been administered via central venous catheters (CVCs), primarily due to concerns of peripheral extravasation of vasoconstrictive medications. Recent studies have suggested that vasopressor administration via peripheral intravenous catheters (PiVCs) may be a feasible and safe alternative. This systematic review evaluates the safety of delivering vasopressor medications via PiVCs. Methods: We performed a systematic review to assess the frequency of complications associated with the delivery of vasopressors via PiVCs. A literature search for prospective and retrospective studies of vasopressor infusions in adults was performed. We included studies of continuous infusions of vasopressor medications (noradrenaline, adrenaline, metaraminol, phenylephrine, dopamine and vasopressin) delivered via a PiVCs that included at least 20 patients. Data on patient factors, cannulation approach, monitoring protocols, vasopressor dosing and dilutions and adverse events were collected and summarised. Results: Seven studies were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 1382 patients. No study fulfilled all of the validity criteria. Noradrenaline was the most commonly administered agent (n = 702 episodes of administration), followed by phenylephrine (n = 546), dopamine (n = 108), metaraminol (n = 74) and vasopressin and adrenaline (<5 patients). Mean duration of infusion was 22 h (95% confidence interval [CI] 8-36 h). Extravasation occurred in 3.4% (95% CI 2.5-4.7%) of patients. There were no reported episodes of tissue necrosis or limb ischaemia. All extravasation events were successfully managed conservatively or with vasodilatory medications. Conclusions: Reports of the administration of vasopressors via PiVCs, when given for a limited duration, under close observation, suggest that extravasation is uncommon and is unlikely to lead to major complications.
Safety of Peripherally Infused Sympathomimetic Vasopressors in the Intensive Care Unit and Emergency Department

Albert Zichichi,Ryan Wallace,Jessica Daniell,Ginger Rouse,Paul Ahearn,Mahmoud Ammar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10600280241284796

IF: 3.4628

2024-10-18

Annals of Pharmacotherapy

Abstract:Annals of Pharmacotherapy, Ahead of Print. Background:Sympathomimetic vasopressors may be administered through a peripheral catheter, but there are limited data available on the safety of peripheral use.Objective:The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety of peripherally infused sympathomimetic vasopressors.Methods:A multicenter, retrospective observational study was conducted to evaluate patients who received peripheral vasopressors. The study's primary outcome was to assess the incidence of extravasation during the administration of peripheral vasopressors. Secondary outcomes include avoidance of central venous catheter (CVC) placement and institution protocol deviations.Results:There were 198 patients included in the study, of which 142 patients received norepinephrine, 48 patients received phenylephrine, and 8 patients received epinephrine peripherally. Extravasation events occurred in 11 (5.6%) patients. Seven patients required a pharmacologic antidote and 10 patients required a warm compress. No significant differences were seen in characteristics of patients who extravasated compared with those who did not. Protocol deviations identified during the study included 24 (12.1%) patients receiving doses above the protocol maximum, 19 (9.6%) with a body mass index above the protocol maximum, and 45 (22.7%) patients receiving peripheral vasopressor over 24 hours. The majority of patients were able to avoid CVC placement (59.1%).Conclusion and Relevance:Peripherally infused sympathomimetic vasopressors are safe to administer up to 24 hours with a low incidence of extravasation events while avoiding CVC placement in the majority of patients.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Retrospective Data about the Catheter-Related Complications and Management in Massive Bus Burn Casualties.

Hongfei Jiang,Hang Hu,Haitao Ren,Chunmao Han,Xingang Wang,Chuangang You,Ruiyi Zhao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5301/jva.5000547

2016-01-01

Abstract:PURPOSE:This is a single-center, descriptive report of the management and complications of venous catheter use in 19 severely burned passengers from a bus fire that occurred on July 5, 2014, in Hangzhou.METHODS:We recorded the parameters of the catheters insertion and indwelling. Sampling of each removed catheter was conducted to monitor for catheter-related infections. Bedside ultrasound screening was performed for recording central venous catheter (CVC)-related complications.RESULTS:Of the 174 venous accesses placed, 108 were CVCs. 27 (25.0%) catheter tip cultures (CTC) were positive; 12 (11.1%) were catheter-related blood stream infections (CRBSI). Acinetobacter baumannii was the most prominent bacterial infection for both CTC- (55.56%) and CRBSI- (75.00%) positive catheters. CTC- and CRBSI-positive rates were higher during the emergency stage, and both dropped rapidly after reform measures (chi-square test, p = 0.003), and all were negative after the no.8 catheters. Accumulative regression results indicated that total body surface area burned (TBSA), number of catheters, days of indwelling, and bloodstream infections were independently associated with CTC results, while gender and number of catheters were independently associated with CRBSI results. 1 femur vein thrombosis was detected and cured.CONCLUSIONS:Bedside ultrasound and professional IV team for CVC management are pivotal for massive burn victims. Their intervention helps control CVC-related infections and other complications. A. baumannii was the most frequent bacterial infection found in both CTC- and CRBSI-positive catheters. Several most important factors associated with catheter-related infections were concluded. This information alerts us to watch for patients with such warning factors.
Comparison of extravasation events related to the peripheral administration of vasopressors prior to and following implementation of an institutional protocol

Allison C. Fabick,Jaclyn M. Hawn,Katharine W. Barwick,Erin R. Weeda,Andrew J. Goodwin,Carolyn M. Bell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.1844

2023-06-26

Abstract:Following adequate fluid resuscitation, vasopressors are often utilized to maintain perfusion in shock states. Traditionally, vasopressors are administered via a central venous catheter (CVC) to attempt to minimize extravasation events. New literature advocates for peripheral vasopressor administration when CVC placement could lead to a delay in care. The purpose of this study was to compare extravasation events during vasopressor administration via a peripheral intravenous line (PIV) prior to and following the implementation of an institutional peripheral vasopressor protocol. This was a single‐center, retrospective, observational study conducted at a large academic medical center. Adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) from September 2018 to 2020 who received continuous infusion vasopressors were included. Vasopressors evaluated were norepinephrine, epinephrine, phenylephrine, dopamine, and vasopressin. The primary outcome evaluated extravasation events prior to and following the implementation of an institutional peripheral vasopressor protocol. Of the 3430 patients included, 1532 and 1898 patients were in the pre‐ and post‐protocol implementation groups. Following protocol implementation, there was an increase in PIV utilization, improvement in ultrasound‐guided PIV placement (17% vs. 26%, p < 0.001), and line assessment every 2 h (74% vs. 90%, p < 0.001). Less non‐compliance in vasopressor infusion rates (40% vs. 24%, p < 0.001) and PIV location (18% vs. 10%, p < 0.001) were also observed following protocol implementation. A total of 58 extravasation events occurred in both groups, 15 confirmed events and 43 suspected events. Following protocol implementation, there were less extravasation events (2.4% [n = 37] pre‐ vs. 1.1% [n = 21] post‐protocol p = 0.003). Following the implementation of an institutional protocol, there was a reduction in extravasation events, an improvement in ultrasound‐guided PIV placement, and the use of peripheral infusion practices associated with increased safety. Additional studies are needed to determine the optimal peripheral vasopressor protocol to reduce CVC use and maintain reduced extravasation events.
Does the Midline Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Have a Place in Critical Care?

Barb Nickel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4037/ccn2021818

2021-12-01

Critical Care Nurse

Abstract:Background The goals of infusion therapy are to preserve vascular health and safely deliver needed treatment. Achieving these goals is challenging in critical care because of the complexity of the treatment required. Daily justification of retaining an existing central venous catheter also creates urgency to change to a peripheral vascular access device. The midline catheter has had a resurgence in use because of the need for a long-term peripheral vascular access device not linked to central catheter–associated bloodstream infection risk. Objective To review the characteristics of midline catheters, the benefits and risks of midline catheters, and current evidence regarding midline catheter use in critical care. Results Research related to midline catheters has greatly expanded the body of knowledge regarding vascular access device selection and midline catheter use. Discussion Although the quality and results of research on vascular access devices vary widely, a more accurate safety profile is emerging to illustrate how midline catheter use can support the goals of infusion therapy. Conclusions Optimizing vascular access device selection requires recognition that every vascular access device can cause patient harm. Although the midline catheter appears to fill an important niche in infusion therapy, use of the midline catheter should be carefully evaluated. Midline catheters should not be used as a catheter-associated bloodstream infection prevention strategy, should be inserted to administer peripherally compatible solutions, and should be considered for short-term continuous vesicant therapy only in emergent situations until more definitive vascular access can be achieved.

nursing,critical care medicine
Safety of the Peripheral Administration of Vasopressor Agents

Tyler Lewis,Cristian Merchan,Diana Altshuler,John Papadopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0885066616686035

Abstract:Vasopressors are an integral component of the management of septic shock and are traditionally given via a central venous catheter (CVC) due to the risk of tissue injury and necrosis if extravasated. However, the need for a CVC for the management of septic shock has been questioned, and the risk of extravasation and incidence of severe injury when vasopressors are given via a peripheral venous line (PVL) remains poorly defined. We performed a retrospective chart review of 202 patients who received vasopressors through a PVL. The objective was to describe the vasopressors administered peripherally, PVL size and location, the incidence of extravasation events, and the management of extravasation events. The primary vasopressors used were norepinephrine and phenylephrine. The most common PVL sites used were the forearm and antecubital fossa. The incidence of extravasation was 4%. All of the events were managed conservatively; none required an antidote or surgical management. Vasopressors were restarted at another peripheral site in 88% of the events. The incidence of extravasation was similar to prior studies. The use of a PVL for administration of vasopressors can be considered in patients with a contraindication to a CVC.
Effect of Peripherally Infused Norepinephrine on Reducing Central Venous Catheter Utilization

Sara M. Powell,Andrew C. Faust,Stephy George,Richard Townsend,Darla Eubank,Richard Kim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/nan.0000000000000508

2023-07-01

Journal of Infusion Nursing

Abstract:The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the impact of peripherally administered norepinephrine on avoiding central venous catheter insertion while maintaining safety of the infusion. An institutional guideline allows peripheral infusion of norepinephrine via dedicated, 16- to 20-gauge, mid-to-upper arm intravenous (IV) catheters for up to 24 hours. The primary outcome was the need for central venous access in patients initially started on peripherally infused norepinephrine. A total of 124 patients were evaluated (98 initially on peripherally infused norepinephrine vs 26 with central catheter only administration). Thirty-six (37%) of the 98 patients who were started on peripheral norepinephrine avoided the need for central catheter placement, which was associated with $8,900 in direct supply cost avoidance. Eighty (82%) of the 98 patients who started peripherally infused norepinephrine required the vasopressor for ≤12 hours. No extravasation or local complications were observed in any of the 124 patients, regardless of site of infusion. Administration of norepinephrine via a dedicated peripheral IV site appears safe and may lead to a reduction in the need for subsequent central venous access. To achieve timely resuscitation goals, as well as to minimize complications associated with central access, initial peripheral administration should be considered for all patients.
Efficacy and safety of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in acute cardiac care management

Fabrizio Poletti,Claudio Coccino,Davide Monolo,Paolo Crespi,Giorgio Ciccioli,Giuseppe Cordio,Giovanni Seveso,Stefano De Servi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1129729818758984

Abstract:Purpose: Patients admitted to cardiac intensive care unit need administration of drugs intravenously often in concomitance of therapeutic techniques such as non-invasive ventilation, continuous renal replacement therapy and intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation. Therefore, the insertion of central venous catheters provides a reliable access for delivering medications, laboratory testing and hemodynamic monitoring, but it is associated with the risk of important complications. In our study, we tested the efficacy and safety of peripherally inserted central catheters to manage cardiac intensive care. Methods: All patients admitted to cardiac intensive care unit with indication for elective central venous access were checked by venous arm ultrasound for peripherally inserted central catheter's implantation. Peripherally inserted central catheters were inserted by ultrasound-guided puncture. After 7 days from the catheter's placement and at the removal, vascular ultrasound examination was performed searching signs of upper extremity deep venous thrombosis. In case of sepsis, blood cultures peripherally from the catheter and direct culture of the tip of the catheter were done to establish a catheter-related blood stream infection. Results: In our cardiac intensive care unit, 137 peripherally inserted central catheters were placed: 80.3% of patients eligible for a peripherally inserted central catheter were implanted. The rate of symptomatic catheter-related peripheral venous thrombosis was 1.4%. Catheter-related blood stream infection was diagnosed in one patient (0.7%; 5.7 × 1000 peripherally inserted central catheter days). All peripherally inserted central catheters were inserted successfully without other major complications. Conclusions: In patients admitted to cardiac intensive care unit, peripherally inserted central catheters' insertion was feasible in a high percentage of patients and was associated with low infective complications and clinical thrombosis rate.
[Clinical application study of midline catheter in vasopressor therapy]

Runling Guo,Jianhua Wu,Xiaoying Ren,Chaoli Guo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20240326-00286

Abstract:Objective: To evaluate the safety and necessity of vasopressor infusion through midline catheter. Methods: A convenient sampling method was used for a controlled study. A total of 88 adult patients who used vasopressors admitted to respiratory intensive care unit (RICU) of Fenyang Hospital in Shanxi Province from June 2022 to June 2023 were enrolled as the research subjects. A total of 44 patients who were infused with vasopressors through peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) from June to December 2022 were enrolled as the PICC group, and 44 patients who were infused with vasopressors through midline catheter from January to June 2023 were enrolled as the midline catheter group. Both groups of patients used the modified Sedinger technique under the guidance of B-ultrasound for puncture and catheter placement. The middle 1/3 site between the cubital fossa and the axilla was selected. The catheters were 5 Fr double lumen. After catheter placement, the patients were followed until catheter removal, death, or 30 days (whichever came first). Based on the Infusion therapy standards of practice revised by American Infusion Nurses Society (INS), and combined with the results of previous preliminary tests, the safety evaluation was conducted on incomplete catheter obstruction, catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI), phlebitis, thrombus within the catheter during extubation, redness of the puncture site (but no infection), and exudation of the puncture site in the two groups of patients. Results: There were no statistical differences in gender, age, catheter indwelling time, and primary disease between the two groups, indicating that the baseline data of the two groups were balanced and comparable. No CRBSI or phlebitis occurred in both groups during the observation period after catheterization. One patient in both groups had exudation at the puncture site [both were 2.27% (1/44)]. Compared with the PICC group, the incidence of incomplete catheter obstruction, thrombus within the catheter during extubation, redness of the puncture site (but no infection) in the midline catheter group were lowered [incomplete catheter obstruction: 4.55% (2/44) vs. 6.82% (3/44), thrombus within the catheter during extubation: 0% (0/44) vs. 2.27% (1/44), redness of the puncture site (but no infection): 0% (0/44) vs. 4.55% (2/44)], the overall incidence was significantly decreased [6.82% (3/44) vs. 15.91% (7/44), P < 0.01]. Conclusions: Administering vasopressor through a midline catheter can reduce the incidence of catheter-related complications, decrease the rate of central venous catheterization, and reduce the financial burden on patients.
End‐stage renal disease in a critical patient with superior vena cava syndrome with central vein catheters inserted via the superficial femoral vein: A case study

Chao Yu,Chunhua Gao,Dandan Zhao,Yan Lin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/nicc.13025

2024-01-08

Nursing in Critical Care

Abstract:Superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS) is caused by obstruction to the blood flow through this vein. Indwelling central venous devices, such as cardiac pacemakers and haemodialysis catheters have emerged as the most common benign aetiology of SVCS. SVCS is particularly severe in patients with end‐stage renal disease who require continuous renal replacement therapy plus infusion therapy. The presence of SVCS results in a reduction of available venous access for affected patients. Therefore, venous access plays a crucial role in the management of these patients. The importance of dealing with vascular access (VA) in critical patients with these conditions cannot be overstated. This case describes an 81‐year‐old man with respiratory failure who had end‐stage renal disease complicated with SVCS. Using ultrasound‐guided puncture, we inserted a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) into the superficial femoral vein to meet his infusion requirements in intensive care. After successful placement, the catheter tip position was adjusted using imaging to position the tip relative to the haemodialysis catheter. Whenever patients with severe renal dysfunction are treated, central veins should be preserved. Safe PICC access is possible via the superficial femoral vein to protect the last central VA for rational use. This meets urgent needs for infusion and deserves promotion.

nursing
Influencing Factors of Central Venous Catheter-Associated Bloodstream Infection in Patients with Emergency Hemorrhagic Shock

朱建平,许严新,吴绍宏,王飞瑶,张伟星,王瑞兰

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/jmid.2023.v13.i3.6

2023-01-01

Journal of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Objective: To investigate and analyze the influencing factors of central venous catheter-associated bloodstream infection in patients with emergency hemorrhagic shock. Methods: According to the inclusion criteria, 249 patients with hemorrhagic shock and central venous catheterization admitted to the emergency department of Shanghai First People's Hospital from June 2016 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, and divided into the infection group (54 cases) and the non-infection group (195 cases) according to whether catheter-related bloodstream infection occurred.Multivariate Logistic regression was used to analyze the relationship between central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection and various influencing factors. The etiological and drug susceptibility test data of peripheral venous blood culture, puncture site samples and catheter tip samples from patients with central venous catheter-associated bloodstream infection were statistically analyzed. Results: There were significant differences in age, catheterization location, ultrasound-guided puncture, APACHE ⅱ score, catheter indwelling time and application of broad-spectrum antibiotics between the infected group and the non-infected group (P<0.05). Staphylococcus epidermidis accounted for 44.4%, Escherichia coli 24.1%, and fungi 11.1% in 54 infected patients. The lowest resistance rate of Gram-positive cocci was to vancomycin (3.4%), followed by tetracycline 34.5%, and the highest resistance rate was to amoxicillin 100.0%. Conclusion: The risk factors of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection in patients with emergency hemorrhagic shock include advanced age, femoral vein catheterization, non-ultrasound-guided puncture, high APACHE ⅱ score, catheter retention time, and application of broad-spectrum antibiotics. Staphylococcus epidermidis the common pathogen of central venous catheterization related infection in emergency hemorrhagic shock patients.
Understanding vasopressor intervention and weaning: risk prediction in a public heterogeneous clinical time series database

Mike Wu,Marzyeh Ghassemi,Mengling Feng,Leo A Celi,Peter Szolovits,Finale Doshi-Velez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocw138

2016-10-05

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract:Background: The widespread adoption of electronic health records allows us to ask evidence-based questions about the need for and benefits of specific clinical interventions in critical-care settings across large populations. Objective: We investigated the prediction of vasopressor administration and weaning in the intensive care unit. Vasopressors are commonly used to control hypotension, and changes in timing and dosage can have a large impact on patient outcomes. Materials and Methods: We considered a cohort of 15 695 intensive care unit patients without orders for reduced care who were alive 30 days post-discharge. A switching-state autoregressive model (SSAM) was trained to predict the multidimensional physiological time series of patients before, during, and after vasopressor administration. The latent states from the SSAM were used as predictors of vasopressor administration and weaning. Results: The unsupervised SSAM features were able to predict patient vasopressor administration and successful patient weaning. Features derived from the SSAM achieved areas under the receiver operating curve of 0.92, 0.88, and 0.71 for predicting ungapped vasopressor administration, gapped vasopressor administration, and vasopressor weaning, respectively. We also demonstrated many cases where our model predicted weaning well in advance of a successful wean. Conclusion: Models that used SSAM features increased performance on both predictive tasks. These improvements may reflect an underlying, and ultimately predictive, latent state detectable from the physiological time series.

information science & library science,computer science, information systems, interdisciplinary applications,health care sciences & services,medical informatics

Prediction of Extended Period of Vasopressor Infusion Requiring Central Venous Catheterisation: A Burning Issue in Critical Care

Safety and efficacy of peripheral versus centrally administered vasopressor infusion: A single-centre retrospective observational study

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of central venous catheter for critically ill patients

The development of a nurse-driven protocol for the safe administration of vasopressors through peripheral intravenous catheters

Randomised, controlled, feasibility trial comparing vasopressor infusion administered via peripheral cannula versus central venous catheter for critically ill adults: A study protocol

Use of continuous infusion technique with pre-filled elastic pumps for prevention of centrally inserted central catheter occlusion in critically ill patients: A feasibility study

Peripheral Intravenous Administration of High-Risk Infusions in Critical Care: A Risk-Benefit Analysis

Complication of vasopressor infusion through peripheral venous catheter: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Complications from Administration of Vasopressors Through Peripheral Venous Catheters: An Observational Study

Safety of peripheral administration of vasopressor medications: A systematic review

Safety of Peripherally Infused Sympathomimetic Vasopressors in the Intensive Care Unit and Emergency Department

Retrospective Data about the Catheter-Related Complications and Management in Massive Bus Burn Casualties.

Comparison of extravasation events related to the peripheral administration of vasopressors prior to and following implementation of an institutional protocol

Does the Midline Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Have a Place in Critical Care?

Safety of the Peripheral Administration of Vasopressor Agents

Effect of Peripherally Infused Norepinephrine on Reducing Central Venous Catheter Utilization

Efficacy and safety of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in acute cardiac care management

[Clinical application study of midline catheter in vasopressor therapy]

End‐stage renal disease in a critical patient with superior vena cava syndrome with central vein catheters inserted via the superficial femoral vein: A case study

Influencing Factors of Central Venous Catheter-Associated Bloodstream Infection in Patients with Emergency Hemorrhagic Shock

Understanding vasopressor intervention and weaning: risk prediction in a public heterogeneous clinical time series database