Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) and midline: Experience in a cardiopulmonary critical care unit

Danilo Caserta,Valerio Pico,Stefano Frascarelli,Francesco Sbrana,Bruno Formichi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1129729821993975

2021-02-14

The Journal of Vascular Access

Abstract:The Journal of Vascular Access, Ahead of Print. <br/>

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Clinical Evaluation of the Use of an Intracardiac Electrocardiogram to Guide the Tip Positioning of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters

Ruiyi Zhao,Chunfang Chen,Jingfen Jin,Komal Sharma,Nan Jiang,Yingqin Shentu,Xingang Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.12409

2015-01-01

International Journal of Nursing Practice

Abstract:The use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) provides important central venous accesses for clinical treatments, tests and monitoring. Compared with the traditional methods, intracardiac electrocardiogram (ECG)-guided method has the potential to guide more accurate tip positioning of PICCs. This study aimed to clinically evaluate the effectiveness of an intracardiac ECG to guide the tip positioning by monitoring characteristic P-wave changes. In this study, eligible patients enrolled September 2011 to May 2012 according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria received the catheterization monitored by intracardiac ECG. Then chest radiography was performed to check the catheter position. The results revealed that, with 117 eligible patients, all bar one patient who died (n=116) completed the study, including 60 males and 56 females aged 51.2 +/- 15.1 years. Most (n=113, >97%) had characteristic P-wave changes. The intracardiac ECG-guided positioning procedure achieved correct placement for 112 patients (96.56%), demonstrating 99.12% sensitivity and 100% specificity. In conclusion, the intracardiac ECG can be a promising technique to guide tip positioning of PICCs. However, since the sample size in this study is limited, more experience and further study during clinical practice are needed to demonstrate achievement of optimal catheterization outcomes.
Comparing results of midline catheter and peripherally inserted central catheter in cancer patients under chemotherapy

Faccini Beatrice,Aula Federico,Fontana Vincenzo,Rosa Alessandra,Consoli Damiano,Bondielli Filippo,Bertoglio Sergio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/11297298241289326

2024-10-16

The Journal of Vascular Access

Abstract:The Journal of Vascular Access, Ahead of Print. Background and objectives:Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC), and peripherally inserted midlines (MC) represent a possible less invasive alternative option to totally implantable vascular access devices (TIVAD) in cancer patients. This study aims to investigate the outcomes of PICC, and MC devices in patients undergoing chemotherapy.Methods:A prospective non-concurrent observational study was conducted at the IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova (Italy) on 559 cancer patients candidate to chemotherapy bearing PICC, and MC during the period 2019–2022. The primary endpoint was the comparative analysis for failure of the different types of peripheral insertion accesses requiring removal. Secondary outcome measures were age at diagnosis, gender, period of diagnosis, cancer site and type of chemotherapy. The negative binomial regression analysis was applied to estimate catheter removal rate ratios (RR), along with 95% confidence limits (95% CL), in each category of the risk factors.Results:The median follow-up time was 2.6 months (IQR = 1.4–4.6; min-max = 0.03–12.7), and at the end of the study period, a total of 45 catheter failures were detected. A risk reduction of approximately 75% (RR = 0.24; 95% CL = 0.11–0.51) was emphasized for patients with PICC when compared with those with MLC. Type of chemotherapy and cancer site appeared to be important predictive factors for catheter removal risk.Conclusions:For cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy by a non TIVAD, PICC must be preferred to MC because of higher safety and efficacy.

peripheral vascular disease
Barriers and facilitators for implementing peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) appropriateness guidelines: A longitudinal survey study from 34 Michigan hospitals

Gillian Ray-Barruel,Jennifer Horowitz,Elizabeth McLaughlin,Scott Flanders,Vineet Chopra

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277302

IF: 3.7

2022-11-05

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are prevalent devices for medium-to-long-term intravenous therapy but are often associated with morbid and potentially lethal complications. This multi-center study sought to identify barriers and facilitators of implementing evidence-based appropriateness criteria to improve PICC safety and patient outcomes in a pay-for-performance model. Participating hospitals received an online toolkit with five recommendations: establishing a vascular access committee; implementing a clinical decision tool for PICC appropriateness; avoiding short-term PICC use (≤5 days); increasing use of single-lumen PICCs; and avoiding PICC placement in patients with chronic kidney disease. Longitudinal online surveys conducted biannually October 2014–November 2018 tracked implementation efforts. A total of 306 unique surveys from 34 hospitals were completed. The proportion of hospitals with a dedicated committee overseeing PICC appropriateness increased from 53% to 97%. Overall, 94% of hospitals implemented an initiative to reduce short-term and multi-lumen PICC use, and 91% integrated kidney function into PICC placement decisions. Barriers to implementation included: achieving agreement from diverse disciplines, competing hospital priorities, and delays in modifying electronic systems to enable appropriate PICC ordering. Provision of quarterly benchmarking reports, a decision algorithm, access to an online toolkit, and presence of local champion support were cited as crucial in improving practice. Structured quality improvement efforts including a multidisciplinary vascular access committee, clear targets, local champions, and support from an online education toolkit have led to sustained PICC appropriateness and improved patient safety.

multidisciplinary sciences
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.
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: A Randomized, Controlled, Prospective Trial in Pediatric Surgical Patients

Deborah A. Schwengel,John McGready,Sean M. Berenholtz,Lori J. Kozlowski,David G. Nichols,Myron Yaster

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ane.0000132547.39180.88

2004-10-01

Abstract:Peripherally-inserted central catheters (PICCs) are long-term IV catheters used for drug and fluid administration, blood sampling, or hyperalimentation. The short-term use of PICCs in postoperative patients has not been studied. In this randomized, controlled trial, patients received either a PICC or peripheral IV catheter (PIV). Our outcome measures were patient and parent satisfaction with care, complications of the venous access devices, number of postoperative venipunctures, and cost-effectiveness of use. Satisfaction was significantly more frequent in the PICC group (P < 0.05), and there were significantly fewer postoperative needle punctures in the PICC group compared with the PIV group (P < 0.05). Minor complications were common in the PIV group; major complications were uncommon in both groups. PICCs are more expensive, but better satisfaction can make them a cost-effective option. Additionally, insertion during surgical preparation time in the operating room (OR) means that cost is not increased by adding anesthesiologist and OR time. Anesthesiologists should consider placing PICCs in patients requiring more than 4 days of in-hospital postoperative care, especially if frequent blood sampling or IV access is required.

anesthesiology
A Nurse-Inserted Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Program in General Pediatrics: a Single-Center Experience

Zhuowen Yu,Xiaojing Hu,Xiaofeng Xu,Lili Lin,Ying Gu,Jianguo Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-022-03809-x

2023-01-01

BMC Pediatrics

Abstract:Background A peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) with its tip preferably in the vena cava is essential in caring for patients with chronic conditions in general pediatrics. However, PICC-related complications are concerning and warrant further investigations.ObjectivesTo share the experience of a nurse-inserted peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) program initiated in a general pediatric department. Methods A retrospective descriptive cohort study based on a prospectively collected database was conducted. All PICCs inserted in the departments of gastroenterology and pulmonology in a tertiary pediatric center from Dec. 2015 to Dec. 2019 were included in the study. Complications and risk factors were analyzed by comparing cases with and without complications. We also reported arm movements in correcting mal-positioned newly-inserted PICCs. Results There were 169 cases with a median (IQR) age of 42(6, 108) months who received PICC insertion during a 4-year period. Inflammatory bowel disease was the leading diagnosis accounting for 25.4% (43/169) of all cases. The overall complication rate was 16.4 per 1000 catheter days with malposition and occlusion as the two most common complications. Multivariate models performed by logistic regression demonstrated that young age [p = 0.004, OR (95%CI) = 0.987(0.978, 0.996)] and small PICC diameter (1.9Fr, p = 0.003, OR (95%CI) = 3.936(1.578, 9.818)] were risk factors for PICC complications. Correction of malpositioned catheters was attempted and all succeeded in 9 eligible cases by using arm movements. Conclusion The nurse-inserted PICC program in general pediatrics is feasible with a low rate of complications. PICC tip malposition and occlusion were two major PICC-related complications when low age and small catheter lumina were major risk factors. Furtherly, arm manipulation potentially is an easy and effective approach for correcting malpositioned newly-inserted PICC catheters.
Comparing Complication Rates of Midline Catheter vs Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Meritxell Urtecho,Victor D Torres Roldan,Tarek Nayfeh,Nataly R Espinoza Suarez,Nischal Ranganath,Priya Sampathkumar,Vineet Chopra,Nasia Safdar,Larry J Prokop,John C O’Horo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad024

2023-01-18

Open Forum Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Abstract Background Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and midlines are commonly used devices for reliable vascular access. Infection and thrombosis are the main adverse effects of these catheters. We aimed to evaluate the relative risk of complications from midlines and PICCs. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. The primary outcomes were catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) and thrombosis. Secondary outcomes evaluated included mortality, failure to complete therapy, catheter occlusion, phlebitis, and catheter fracture. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Results Of 8368 citations identified, 20 studies met the eligibility criteria, including 1 RCT and 19 observational studies. Midline use was associated with fewer patients with CRBSI compared with PICCs (odds ratio [OR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.15–0.38). This association was not observed when we evaluated risk per catheter. No significant association was found between catheters when evaluating risk of localized thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. A subgroup analysis based on location of thrombosis showed higher rates of superficial venous thrombosis in patients using midlines (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.48–3.57). We did not identify any significant difference between midlines and PICCs for the secondary outcomes. Conclusions Our findings suggest that patients who use midlines might experience fewer CRBSIs than those who use PICCs. However, the use of midline catheters was associated with greater risk of superficial vein thrombosis. These findings can help guide future cost-benefit analyses and direct comparative RCTs to further characterize the efficacy and risks of PICCs vs midline catheters.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Clinical outcomes of peripherally inserted central catheters in patients with gastroenterological diseases: Report of a 9-year experience

Takehito Yamamoto,Yoichiro Uchida,Jo Yano,Reo Nakano,Yoshiki Oshimo,Takashi Fujimoto,Koji Hisano,Kenzo Nakano,Takayuki Kawai,Yoshihisa Okuchi,Kohta Iguchi,Eiji Tanaka,Meiki Fukuda,Kojiro Taura,Hiroaki Terajima

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/11297298241279063

2024-09-28

The Journal of Vascular Access

Abstract:The Journal of Vascular Access, Ahead of Print. Background:Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are safe and useful alternatives to centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs). Several studies have investigated the effectiveness and safety of PICCs; however, few have focused on their use in patients with gastroenterological diseases. In the present study, we evaluated the outcomes of patients with gastroenterological diseases who received PICCs and identified the risk factors associated with central line–associated blood stream infection (CLABSI).Methods:We retrospectively examined hospitalized patients at our institution who received PICCs between 2015 and 2023. We evaluated the data on their clinical characteristics, complications, and outcomes. Furthermore, we investigated the risk factors for CLABSIs.Results:A total of 405 patients were included (262 men and 143 women). The median age was 71 (range, 15–94) years. The vessels were inserted in the basilic, cephalic, and brachial veins in 366 (90%), 22 (6%), and 17 (4%) patients, respectively. The median procedure time was 32 [6–149] min. The median dwell time was 16 [0–188] days. CLABSI, catheter occlusions, phlebitis, and exit-site skin infection occurred in 14 (3.5%; 1.77/1000 catheter days), 6 (1.5%; 0.76/1000 catheter days), 3 (0.7%; 0.38/1000 catheter days), and 1 (0.2%; 0.13/1000 catheter days) patients, respectively. There was no case of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary thrombosis due to PICC placement. Multivariate analysis performed using a Cox's proportional hazard regression model revealed that patients with gastroenterological malignancies had an independently higher risk for CLABSIs (odds ratio [OR]: 3.25, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05–10.05, p = 0.041) and that older age (⩾70 years) tended to be associated with CLABSIs (OR: 3.61, 95% CI: 0.98–13.32, p = 0.054).Conclusions:Gastroenterological malignancies and older age were associated with a higher risk of CLABSIs. Rigorous catheter management is crucial for preventing complications, particularly in vulnerable patient subgroups.

peripheral vascular disease
Groshong PICC and Home Care: An Opportunity. Clinical Experience after the First 200 Implants

S. Spaziani,T. Micheli,B. Vincenzi,C. Campisi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/112972980000100307

2000-07-01

The Journal of Vascular Access

Abstract:Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC) represent an alternative for critical patient care, and are safer to implant in home patients. The authors report on their experience with the first 200 4 Fr Groshong PICC implanted during the last 18 months. The procedure can be easily applied at home (98% successful implant rate), without the need for fluoroscopic or ultrasound guidance. Moreover, the authors believe that the X-ray control after implant is not strictly necessary. After 11,570 days/catheters, only 5 devices were explanted because of complications: 4 because of sepsis and peripheral phlebitis, and the last was explanted by another medical staff for unclear reasons. The complications needing no explanation were a total of 32: for 12 of them the external portion of tube was damaged during use, while for the other 20 the internal clots were resolved with forced flushing. The authors conclude that Groshong PICC can be considered the gold standard for home care management of critical patients, taking into account the quality of pure silicon, the presence of a valve and the specially-made closed-tip.
P146 PERIPHERALLY INSERTED CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER AND PERSISTENT LEFT SUPERIOR VENA CAVA: WHAT SHOULD WE KNOW?

M Gatto,E Celli,I Ferrari,G Biava,E Nicastri,A Antinori

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartjsupp/suad111.228

2023-05-01

European Heart Journal Supplements

Abstract:Abstract Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are widely used medical devices to provide medium to long–term infusion treatment and therapy. PICC placement is contraindicated in cases of deep–vein thrombosis, end–stage renal disease or if deep venous access is compromised. Among the possible complications there are some related to the interventional procedure (e.g. accidental puncture of an arterial vessel, injury to peripheral nerves, misplacement, arrhythmias, haematoma) and others related to the post–implantation phase (e.g. thrombosis, infection, gas emboli, phlebitis). One of the possible intra–procedural complications is the occasional finding of a persistent left superior vena cava (PLSVC). PLSVC is an anatomical variant present in at least 0.5% of the general population and its occurrence during interventional procedures is not uncommon. Clinical case description An 82–year–old woman was admitted to our Institute following a diagnosis of herpetic encephalitis (HSV1). She had a history of hypothyroidism undergoing substitution treatment. Cause the poor peripheral venous patrimony and the need of infusion therapy with acyclovir, levetiracetam and ceftriaxone, the indication for PICC implantation was given. After antibiotic prophylaxis and sterile field preparation, the procedure was performed with ultrasound–guided Seldinger technique by puncturing the left basilic vein. A successive X–ray showed the PICC running unusually parallel to the right sternum (Fig. 1). The echoscopy with bubble test allowed to visualize the agitated saline solution in the right atrium. In view of the suspected venous abnormality, the PICC was removed and a single–lumen MiniMidline 4F of 11 cm length was placed in the right basilic vein (4 mm). A subsequent chest CT scan visualised the PLSVC and its intrathoracic course, the presence of the right superior vena cava was also observed (Fig. 2). The PLSVC is an anatomical variant encountered during interventional procedures involving peripherally inserted central venous catheters. It is important to recognise this variant to avoid possible procedural and/or post–procedural related surgical complications.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
The feasibility of peripherally inserted central catheters use for intermediate-to long-term infusion at a tertiary pediatric hospital: sixty cases report.

Zhuo-wen YU,Ying GU,Yu-xia ZHANG,Ying HUANG,Guo-mei SHEN,Xiao-jing HU

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1673-5501.2017.01.004

2017-01-01

Abstract:Objective To examine the use of peripherally inserted central catheters(PICCs)in a tertiary pediatric setting.Methods The recruited patients with PICC line for intermediate-to long-term fluid infusion were collected from the Pulmonology and Gastroenterology Departments of Children's Hospital of Fudan University from Dec.2015 to Feb.2017.Data of indications,complications,efficacy of PICC and reasons for catheter removal were collected and analyzed.Results 60 cases with PICC insertions(1 case was a child with PICC contraindication)were included in the analysis.There were 38 male cases and 22 female cases with age of 34 days to 14 years.The indications for PICC insertion included long-term parenteral nutrition(45/60,75.0%),expected long-term(>6 days)intravenous medication infusion(9/60,15.0％)and insufficiency of peripheral venous access(6/60,10％).Catheter indwelling time was(17.2±10.7)d,while total indwelling time was 1 033 catheter days.Complications occurred in 22 cases(22.3/1000 catheter days),including 7 malposition,6 catheter blockage,3 phlebitis,3 catheter breakage,2 arterial puncture,1 vasospasm,1 case of failing venous reflux.42 cases(70％)were planned on catheter removal,while 5 cases(8.3％)were unplanned on catheter removal,13 cases(21.7％)were transferred to the other ward or discharged with the catheter.The average PICC procedure time was(68.2±43.5)min,and catheter-related expenditure/hospitalization expenditure ratio was 0.07.Conclusion As an applicable venous access,PICCs provide convenience in patients requiring intermediate-to long-term intravenous infusion.Meticulous post procedure care is important for minimizing unexpected line removal and catheter related complications.
Clinical study of complications of a peripherally inserted central catheter in cancer patients

André Luis Victor Bonfim,Germana Alves de Brito,Aline Lourenço Baptista,Luis André Silvestre Andrade,Marina Harume Imanishe,Benedito Jorge Pereira

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1690

Abstract:Aim: To evaluate complications after PICC use in cancer patients. Design: This was a clinical and retrospective study in which the risk factors and complications of PICC use were evaluated. Methods: This study was carried out in the patient, emergency room, and intensive care units through the evaluation of electronic medical records. To assess the association between qualitative variables, the chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test was used, and to compare the reason for withdrawal, the Kruskal-Wallis test was applied. Results: A total of 359 patients (53.5% men) with 43.1 ± 14 years who had a PICC (88% with solid tumours) were evaluated. The most common complications were mechanical complications (61.2%), infection (38%), and thrombosis (57.1%). Patients with double-lumen catheters experienced thrombosis (85.7%). This study demonstrated the effectiveness of PICC and that patients with haematological cancer are more prone to multiple PICC passages and more mechanical complications and infections.
Clinical study on the application of peripherally inserted central catheters for critically ill neonates

Lou Xiaofang,Ma Meifang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16821/j.cnki.hsjx.2007.23.004

2007-01-01

Abstract:Objective To study the catheter features such as catheter life,completion of therapy,complications and the correlation between the weight of infant and the length of catheter for critically ill neonates treated with PICC in NICU. Method A prospective study for all PICC inserted in the N1CU at the children's Hospital for four years.All clinical data of infant with PICC was collected and analyzed.Result 507 PICC were inserted among 502 infants.Providing nutrition,anti-infection treatment and applying vasoactive medication was the common reason for PICC insertion.Average catheter life was 15.53 days.Completion of therapy was achieved in 84.43%(423 cases).16.57%(84 cases) PICC were removed for complication.The rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection was 2.16/1000 catheter days.The proportion of non-central location of the catheter tip was significantly difference between the veins for insertion.The reference of catheter length for insertion was suggested according the infant weight in different vein.Conclusion PICC provides reliable and safe access for prolonged IV therapy in critically ill neonates and very low birth weight infants.The low incidence of complication with PICC makes them an attractive device for prolonged IV access.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE USE OF A CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER AND A CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER PERIPHERAL INSERTION: ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES AND RISK FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH PROCEDURE

Marcus Baia Fonseca,Leonardo Tedesco Totola,Giani Bianchi Soares,Vivian Peixoto Costa,Sangia Feucht Freire Nasser Barbosa da Silva,Monique Almeida Carvalho,GuilhermeIglezia Santos,Delio Tiago Martins Malaquias,Elisa Favareto Prezotto,Pietro Gabriel Rabello Dixini,Carlos Eduardo de Souza Macie,Ana Beatriz Uta Ramos,Georgia Leite Aragao Pereira,Regilane da Silva,Rogerio Leite dos Santos,Thiago Augusto Rochetti Bezerra

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/17283

2023-07-31

International Journal of Advanced Research

Abstract:Central venous access is a frequent procedure in intensive care units. The peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) is an intravenous device, made of soft and flexible material (polyurethane or carbonane). its disadvantages, and the risks associated with each procedure. Material and Methods: This article is a systematic review, based on the PRISMA methodology (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). Central Venous Catheter: Some complications result from its use, such as infection, obstruction, infiltration or extravasation, among others. Some of these events can be handled, but device removal cannot always be avoided. The peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) is an intravenous device, made of soft and flexible material (polyurethane or carbonane), introduced through a superficial or deep vein of the arm, which progresses to the superior vena cava located in the thorax. In this sense, the PICC is the first choice for central venous access after umbilical catheterization, standing out over the conventional central venous catheter. Final Considerations: It is emphasized that serious complications are associated with the use of CVC and PICC, which may result in death. Therefore, correctly performing the technique of handling these devices, avoiding infections and obstructions, as well as knowing how to identify, prevent and treat possible complications, should be considered good clinical practices that contribute to a better useful life of the device and quality of life for its user.
[An experience in nursing an acute lymphocytic leukemia patient with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter]

Hsuan Lee,Hsiu-Hua Lee,Ching-Huey Chen

Abstract:The Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) is still in its infancy in Taiwan. It has many advantages, including safety, simplicity, and few complications during the insertion process. It is suitable for patients who need long-term parenteral administration of medication or chemotherapy. However, the duration of PICC implantation is around six months, or even up to one year. As a result, it is very important to educate patients to take care of themselves throughout the implantation period in order to prevent complications. This report describes the experience of nursing a forty-four-year old male patient who suffered from acute lymphocytic leukemia and received a PICC implantation while undergoing chemotherapy treatment. As a PICC case manager, the author utilized self-efficacy theory and devoted herself to nursing care, interviews and phone calls to collect valuable information. During the process of PICC implantation, the author analyzed the characteristics of this case and assisted the patient and his primary care giver in choosing a suitable catheter and self-care techniques to achieve minimal complications during implantation. It is hoped that, by sharing in her experience, nursing staff may enhance their ability to assist patients with PICC and to help them to maintain their quality of life.
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC) Lines in Oncology Patients: Patient Satisfaction, Outcomes and Cost Comparison – Experience of an Indian Tertiary Cancer Care Institute

Shubhangi Jaid,Vaishali Sawant,Prriya Eshpuniyani,Shravan Shetty,Ramakant Deshpande,Anupama Borkar,Madhuri Dighe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5530/ijmedph.2022.2.17

2022-04-29

International Journal of Medicine and Public Health

Abstract:Abstract:Long term venous access is needed in patients suffering from cancer for administering drugs, chemotherapy, blood collection, transfusions etc. Central venous catheters introduced in the 1980s have been a boon for these patients minimizing their need for repeated trauma. Of the various types of central venous access devices (CVAD’s) available, in developing countries like India, some of the limiting factors to decide what type of CVAD is used are the cost involved and the necessary training for the maintenance of the device. Our aim was to review our experience of PICC (Peripherally inserted central catheter) lines over 3 years, to analyze conditions for which PICC lines were used, catheter indwelling period, incidence and types of complications, reasons for removal and quality of life of these patients. We also attempted to compare costs of PICC lines with Chemoport management in our institute. Total 100 patients were followed up for 3 consecutive years, of which 75 were solid tumours and 25 were haematological. The median age was 33 years (Range 2 –77 ). The average duration of indwelling catheter is ranged 2 days–12 months. PICC line was found to be more cost-effective than Chemoport insertion in the overall scenario. 21% of patients had complications related to the management of PICC lines. The overall quality of life was maintained well with PICC line. Conclusion: PICC lines in oncology patients are reasonably safe for long lasting CVAD with acceptable incidence of complications. They are also cost effective compared to Chemoports in developing countries.
Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-related thrombosis in critically ill patients

Vasileios Zochios,Imraan Umar,Nicola Simpson,Nicola Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5301/jva.5000239

Abstract:Background: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) are being increasingly used in critical care setting. However, PICCs are associated with a number of complications, particularly upper extremity venous thrombosis (UEVT), leading to post-thrombotic syndrome, pulmonary embolism and increased risk of catheter-related infection. Objective: To review the literature surrounding PICCs and highlight the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and management of PICC-related thrombosis in critically ill patients. Data sources and extraction: We performed an electronic literature search of the databases PubMed, EMBASE and Google scholar using set search terms, from their commencement date to the end of January 2014. Summary of review: It has been shown that PICCs may double the risk of deep venous thrombosis compared with centrally inserted venous catheters, in critically ill patients. However, the incidence of PICC-related thrombosis in critically ill patients has not been quantified. Ultrasonography is the preferred diagnostic imaging modality. There are no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the best treatment of PICC-related thrombosis in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting and in most cohort studies, anticoagulation strategies with or without PICC removal have been used. Conclusions: Decision to insert a PICC should be taken after careful risk stratification. There is lack of high-quality evidence assessing prevention strategies and management of PICC-related thrombosis in the ICU. Well-designed RCTs are required to estimate the prevalence of UEVT in ICU patients with PICCs and evaluate the efficacy and magnitude of clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of therapeutic strategies.
A multicenter retrospective study on 4480 implanted PICC-ports: A GAVeCeLT project

Sergio Bertoglio,Maria Giuseppina Annetta,Fabrizio Brescia,Alessandro Emoli,Fabio Fabiani,Maria Fino,Domenico Merlicco,Andrea Musaro,Marina Orlandi,Laura Parisella,Fulvio Pinelli,Simona Reina,Valentina Selmi,Nicola Solari,Fausto Tricarico,Mauro Pittiruti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/11297298211067683

2022-01-17

The Journal of Vascular Access

Abstract:Background: PICC-ports may be defined as totally implantable central venous devices inserted in the upper limb using the current state-of-the-art techniques of PICC insertion (ultrasound-guided venipuncture of deep veins of the arm, micro-puncture kits, proper location of the tip preferably by intracavitary ECG), with placement of the reservoir at the middle third of the arm. A previous report on breast cancer patients demonstrated the safety and efficacy of these devices, with a very low failure rate. Methods: This retrospective multicenter cohort study—developed by GAVeCeLT (the Italian Group of Long-Term Venous Access Devices)—investigated the outcomes of PICC-ports in a large cohort of unselected patients. The study included 4480 adult patients who underwent PICC-port insertion in five Italian centers, during a period of 60 months. The primary outcome was device failure, defined as any serious adverse event (SAE) requiring removal. The secondary outcome was the incidence of temporary adverse events (TAE) not requiring removal. Results: The median follow-up was 15.5 months. Device failure occurred in 52 cases (1.2%), the main causes being local infection ( n = 7; 0.16%) and CRBSI ( n = 19; 0.42%). Symptomatic catheter-related thrombosis occurred in 93 cases (2.1%), but removal was required only in one case (0.02%). Early/immediate and late TAE occurred in 904 cases (20.2%) and in 176 cases (3.9%), respectively. Conclusions: PICC-ports are safe venous access devices that should be considered as an alternative option to traditional arm-ports and chest-ports when planning chemotherapy or other long-term intermittent intravenous treatments.
Assessment of the complications of peripherally inserted central catheter in neonates admitted to the intensive care unit: A center's experience in Iran

Raheleh Moradi,Mamak Shariat,Nahid Farrokhzad,Ameneh Abroon,Soheila Kafi,Azadeh Hamidpoor,Elaheh Hassani,Hasti Charousaei,Fatemeh Sadat Nayeri

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_20_21

2022-11-18

Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research

Abstract:Background: Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC), which is inserted through peripheral veins into the superior or inferior vena cava, is used to inject medications or parenteral nutrition in neonates with long-term hospitalization in the intensive care unit. In this study, we assessed the complications of PICC in neonates admitted to the intensive care unit in hospital. Materials and Methods: In the present retrospective cohort, neonates admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) of Valiasr Hospital during 2015-2018 had been divided into two groups with PICC and without it. Data included the occurrence of septicemia, tachycardia, perforation of large veins, pulmonary hypertension, cardiac tamponade, pericardial effusion, catheter site necrosis, hemorrhage, anemia, pleural effusion, ascites, phlebitis of catheter track and neonatal death, which were collected, using the comprehensive neonatal registry of Valiasr Hospital. Data analysis was performed with regression, mantel-haenszel and independent t -test. Results: Data from 174 neonates with PICC were compared to 207 infants with classic IV-Line. In the exposure group, the gestational age and birth weight were lower. Based on the results of the double logistic regression test, septicemia and hemorrhage in the injection site, independent of other variables, were related to the use of PICC and the risk of septicemia or hemorrhage in the injection site was significantly reduced if PCIC was used ( p < 0.01). Conclusions: Using the PICC as a therapeutic procedure in hospitalized neonates in the NICU is a safe method. By improving its replacement skills among physicians and nurses, its side effects are minor and negligible.
Migrated Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter in the Right Ventricle and Bilateral Pulmonary Arteries: A Case Report

Reena Anand,Vineeta Dagar,Rajeev Aggarwal,Sandeep Batra

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1744234

2024-04-21

Abstract:Introduction Central venous catheterization is a common tool widely used in medical treatment for long-term intravenous administration of medication (e.g. chemotherapy or antibiotics) or parenteral nutrition. Here, we present a case of a missing peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) which was detected on computed tomography (CT) scan thorax. Case Report A 50-year-old female admitted for follow-up for adenocarcinoma rectum was found to have a missing PICC line and advised CT thorax for evaluation. The imaging findings revealed coiled PICC line in the right atrium extending to inferior vena cava and into right ventricle and further extending and coiled PICC is seen in the main, right, and left pulmonary arteries. Through emergency interventional procedure, the PICC line was successfully retrieved percutaneously via the right femoral vein. Conclusion PICC fracture is less common and always seen without significant discomfort if not found timely, and it may lead to serious complications, such as pulmonary embolism, and even death. Early detection and removal may help to prevent signiﬁcant mortality.

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) and midline: Experience in a cardiopulmonary critical care unit

Clinical Evaluation of the Use of an Intracardiac Electrocardiogram to Guide the Tip Positioning of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters

Comparing results of midline catheter and peripherally inserted central catheter in cancer patients under chemotherapy

Barriers and facilitators for implementing peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) appropriateness guidelines: A longitudinal survey study from 34 Michigan hospitals

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

Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: A Randomized, Controlled, Prospective Trial in Pediatric Surgical Patients

A Nurse-Inserted Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Program in General Pediatrics: a Single-Center Experience

Comparing Complication Rates of Midline Catheter vs Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Clinical outcomes of peripherally inserted central catheters in patients with gastroenterological diseases: Report of a 9-year experience

Groshong PICC and Home Care: An Opportunity. Clinical Experience after the First 200 Implants

P146 PERIPHERALLY INSERTED CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER AND PERSISTENT LEFT SUPERIOR VENA CAVA: WHAT SHOULD WE KNOW?

The feasibility of peripherally inserted central catheters use for intermediate-to long-term infusion at a tertiary pediatric hospital: sixty cases report.

Clinical study of complications of a peripherally inserted central catheter in cancer patients

Clinical study on the application of peripherally inserted central catheters for critically ill neonates

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE USE OF A CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER AND A CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER PERIPHERAL INSERTION: ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES AND RISK FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH PROCEDURE

[An experience in nursing an acute lymphocytic leukemia patient with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter]

Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC) Lines in Oncology Patients: Patient Satisfaction, Outcomes and Cost Comparison – Experience of an Indian Tertiary Cancer Care Institute

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-related thrombosis in critically ill patients

A multicenter retrospective study on 4480 implanted PICC-ports: A GAVeCeLT project

Assessment of the complications of peripherally inserted central catheter in neonates admitted to the intensive care unit: A center's experience in Iran

Migrated Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter in the Right Ventricle and Bilateral Pulmonary Arteries: A Case Report