Safety and effectiveness of tunneled peripherally inserted central catheters versus conventional PICC in adult cancer patients
Jia Li,Zeyin Hu,Mengna Luo,Zhenming Wu,Xinman Dou,Zhiying Wang,Shuang Yu,Liping Xiao,Jinhua Qiu,Shuxian Yu,Mengyun Chen,Suxiang Lu,Binglian Su,Li Cheng,Yuying Fan,Hui-Ying Qin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10852-y
2024-06-28
Abstract:Objectives: This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of tunneled peripherally inserted central catheters (T-PICC) vs. conventional PICCs (C-PICC) in adult cancer patients. Methods: A multicentre randomized controlled trial was conducted between April 2021 and January 2022 in seven hospitals in China. 564 participants were randomly assigned to T-PICC or C-PICC. These data were collected and compared: the baseline characteristics and catheterization-related characteristics, periprocedural complications, and long-term complications. Results: Five-hundred fifty-three participants (aged, 52.6 ± 12.3 years; female, 39.1%) were ultimately analyzed. No significant differences in periprocedural complications were found between the T-PICC and C-PICC groups (all p > 0.05). Compared with C-PICC, T-PICC significantly reduced the incidence of long-term complications (26.4% vs. 39.9%, p < 0.001). Specifically, reduced complications were found in central line-associated bloodstream infection (1.8% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.04), thrombosis (1.1% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.03), catheter dislodgement (4.7% vs. 10.1%, p = 0.01), non-infectious oozing (17.3% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.002), local infection (3.6% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.04), skin irritation (6.1% vs. 10.9%, p = 0.046), and reduced unplanned catheter removal (2.2% vs. 7.2%, p = 0.005). No significant differences were found between T-PICC and C-PICC regarding catheter occlusion (6.5% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.73) or skin damage (2.2% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.58). Conclusion: T-PICC is safe and effectively reduces long-term complications. Clinical relevance statement: The tunneled technique is effective in reducing PICC-related long-term complications. Thus, it is recommended for cancer patients at high risk of PICC-related complications. Trial registration: The registration number on https://www.chictr.org.cn/ is ChiCTR2100044632. The name of the trial registry is "A multicenter randomized controlled study of clinical use of tunneled vs. non-tunneled PICC". Key points: Cather-related complications are associated with the technique of catheterization. Compared with conventional PICC, tunneled PICC reduced catheter-related long-term complications. Tunneled PICC placement provides an alternative catheterization method for cancer patients.