Bard PowerPICC Solo2 vs Cook Turbo-Ject: A Tale of Two PICCs

Peripherally inserted central catheter design and material for reducing catheter failure and complications

BACKGROUND

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) facilitate diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in health care. PICCs can fail due to infective and non-infective complications, which PICC materials and design may contribute to, leading to negative sequelae for patients and healthcare systems.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of PICC material and design in reducing catheter failure and complications.

SEARCH METHODS

The University of Queensland and Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 16 May 2023. We aimed to identify other potentially eligible trials or ancillary publications by searching the reference lists of retrieved included trials, as well as relevant systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology assessment reports. We contacted experts in the field to ascertain additional relevant information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PICC design and materials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were venous thromboembolism (VTE), PICC-associated bloodstream infection (BSI), occlusion, and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were catheter failure, PICC-related BSI, catheter breakage, PICC dwell time, and safety endpoints. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs involving approximately 2913 participants (one multi-arm study). All studies except one had a high risk of bias in one or more risk of bias domain. Integrated valve technology compared to no valve technology for peripherally inserted central catheter design Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to VTE risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 2.63; I² = 0%; 3 studies; 437 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether integrated valve technology reduces PICC-associated BSI risk, as the certainty of the evidence is very low (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.00; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to occlusion risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.38; I² = 0%; 5 studies; 900 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether use of integrated valve technology reduces all-cause mortality risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.64; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 473 participants). Integrated valve technology may make little or no difference to catheter failure risk when compared with PICCs with no valve (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.03; I² = 0%; 4 studies; 720 participants; low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether integrated-valve technology reduces PICC-related BSI risk (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.32; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 542 participants) or catheter breakage, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.22 to 5.06; I² = 20%; 4 studies; 799 participants). Anti-thrombogenic surface modification compared to no anti-thrombogenic surface modification for peripherally inserted central catheter design We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces risk of VTE (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.54; I² = 15%; 2 studies; 257 participants) or PICC-associated BSI, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.00; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces occlusion (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.04 to 11.22; I² = 70%; 2 studies; 257 participants) or all-cause mortality risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.26; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 111 participants). Use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter failure (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.54; I² = 46%; 2 studies; 257 participants; low certainty evidence). No PICC-related BSIs were reported in one study (111 participants). As such, we are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces PICC-related BSI risk (RR not estimable; I² = not applicable; very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether use of anti-thrombogenic surface modified catheters reduces the risk of catheter breakage, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.79; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 257 participants). Antimicrobial impregnation compared to non-antimicrobial impregnation for peripherally inserted central catheter design We are uncertain whether use of antimicrobial-impregnated catheters reduces VTE risk (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.88; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 167 participants) or PICC-associated BSI risk, as the certainty of evidence is very low (RR 2.17, 95% CI 0.20 to 23.53; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 167 participants). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters probably make little or no difference to occlusion risk (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 1025 participants; moderate certainty evidence) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.75; I² = 0%; 2 studies; 1082 participants; moderate certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter failure (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 221 participants; low certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters probably make little or no difference to PICC-related BSI risk (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.55; I² = not applicable; 2 studies (no events in 1 study); 1082 participants; moderate certainty evidence). Antimicrobial-impregnated catheters may make little or no difference to risk of catheter breakage (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.19 to 3.83; I² = not applicable; 1 study; 804 participants; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited high-quality RCT evidence available to inform clinician decision-making for PICC materials and design. Limitations of the current evidence include small sample sizes, infrequent events, and risk of bias. There may be little to no difference in the risk of VTE, PICC-associated BSI, occlusion, or mortality across PICC materials and designs. Further rigorous RCTs are needed to reduce uncertainty.

Trends in the prevalence and risk factors for peripherally inserted central catheter-related complications in cancer patients from 2016 to 2022: a multicenter study

PURPOSE

To identify the trends in the prevalence of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) related complications in cancer patients and explore the risk factors for complications and occurrence speed.

METHODS

A total of 3573 cancer patients with PICC were recruited at 17 hospitals from 2016 to 2022. Logistic and COX regression were performed to identify influencing factors of PICC-related complications and incidence speed, respectively.

RESULTS

The proportion of symptomatic PICC-related thrombosis, phlebitis, and infections reported had decreased from 59.1% (in 2017), 11.9% (in 2016), and 11.1% (in 2016) to 15.3% (in 2022), 2.9% (in 2022), and 7.4% (in 2022), and adhesive-related skin injuries and bleeding/oozing reported had increased from 4.8% (in 2016) and 0.0% (in 2016) to 45.5% (in 2022) and 3.4% (in 2022), respectively. Catheter occlusion showed a trend of first increasing and then decreasing from 2.4 (in 2016) to 12.0 (in 2020) to 5.8% (in 2022). Logistic regression showed that hospital level, nature, the patient's gender, age, diagnosis, history of deep vein catheterization, chemotherapy drug administration, and type of PICC were influencing factors of complications. COX regression showed that the patient's gender, age, diagnosis, history of deep vein thrombosis and thrombophlebitis, history of deep vein catheterization, chemotherapy drug administration, type of PICC, type of connector, and StatLock used for fixation were influencing factors of incidence speed.

CONCLUSION

The composition ratios of PICC-related complications in cancer patients in China have changed in recent years. Chemotherapy drug administration was a significant risk factor accelerating the occurrence of complications. Maintenance factors had the maximum weight on the COX model, followed by patient factors. It is suggested that patients with high-risk factors be closely monitored and proper maintenance be performed to prevent and delay the occurrence of PICC-related complications.

Types of peripherally inserted central catheters and the risk of unplanned removals in patients: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Peripherally inserted central catheters are widely used in clinical practice. Despite the many advantages of peripherally inserted central catheters, unplanned removals can occur owing to irreversible complications and may have adverse consequences for patients. However, the relationship between peripherally inserted central catheter type and the incidence of unplanned removal is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between the type of peripherally inserted central catheter and unplanned catheter removal.

DESIGN

A multicenter prospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

Sixty hospitals located in 30 cities across seven provinces in China.

PARTICIPANTS

Three thousand two hundred and twenty-two patients aged 18 years or older with one peripherally inserted central catheter inserted for treatment were enrolled, and 3166 (98.3 %) patients with follow-up data were included in the final analysis.

METHODS

The included participants had peripherally inserted central catheters that either had a proximal valve (n = 2436) or were open-ended (n = 730). A competing risk Cox regression model was used, and both univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. A sub-distribution hazard model was applied to test the validity of the results.

RESULTS

Of the 2436 peripherally inserted central catheters with a proximal valve and 730 that were open-ended, 272 (11.2 %) and 46 (6.3 %) were removed unplanned, respectively. The whole incidence of unplanned removal was 10.04 %; multivariate Cox regression was conducted and it was determined that unplanned removal was statistically significantly associated with the proximal valve peripherally inserted central catheter type (hazard ratio: 1.86, 95 % confidence interval: 1.28 to 2.70, p = 0.001). In patients without cancer, the risk of unplanned removal of peripherally inserted central catheters with a proximal valve was 8.14 times higher than that of open-ended peripherally inserted central catheters (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, peripherally inserted central catheters with a proximal valve had a higher risk of unplanned removals, especially in patients without cancer. The peripherally inserted central catheter type should be considered in advance, and clinical staff should take appropriate measures to prevent unplanned removals after insertion.

Dual-lumen power injectable peripherally inserted central catheters in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A prospective observational study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore whether dual-lumen power injectable peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) could be effectively and safely applied in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) and for serum cyclosporine level monitoring.

BACKGROUND

Compared to conventional central venous access devices, PICC provides a feasible route not only for fluid infusion, but also for blood sample collection in patients undergoing oncological treatments.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study was conducted according to the STROBE guidelines.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated the applications and complications of power injectable PICCs in 52 consecutive allo-HSCT recipients. We also compared the cyclosporine levels in 188 paired blood samples, simultaneously obtained via power injectable PICCs and percutaneous venous puncture, to investigate whether power injectable PICC is a feasible route for cyclosporine concentration monitoring in allo-HSCT.

RESULTS

The median PICC placement duration was 29 days. The insertion-site blood oozing and central line-associated bloodstream infection rates were 36.5% (19/52) and 26.9% (14/52), respectively, indicating the feasibility of these PICCs for various applications in allo-HSCT. No power injectable PICC-related thrombotic adverse events were identified; 90.4% (47/52) of cases with power injectable PICC removal occurred because of lack of medical utility, suggesting that power injectable PICC-related complications were manageable. However, cyclosporine levels in samples obtained via these PICCs were significantly higher than those in samples obtained via percutaneous venous puncture (261.5 ± 139.2 vs. 232.4 ± 253.6 ng/ml; p = 0.019 [set 1]; 254.8 ± 89.3 vs. 225.1 ± 233.3 ng/ml; p<0.001 [set 2]; 283.6 ± 103.9 vs. 238.0 ± 254.7 ng/ml; p = 0.006 [set 3]; 291.0 ± 94.9 vs. 266.0 ± 274.7 ng/ml; p = 0.016 [set 4]).

CONCLUSION

The power injectable PICC is a feasible venous access device for allo-HSCT.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The dual-lumen power injectable PICCs provided a reliable access for blood sample collection, decreasing the number of blind percutaneous venous punctures in allo-HSCT. However, its application in cyclosporine level monitoring needs further investigation.

Evaluating the Impact of Central Venous Catheter Materials and Design on Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Thrombosis is a common complication associated with central venous catheter (CVC) insertion. Several antithrombogenic materials and alterations to catheter design have been developed to lower thrombosis rates.

AIM

To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of antithrombogenic materials and alterations to CVC design on thrombosis rates.

METHODS

A systematic search was completed of main databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed) as well as trial registries and gray literature. Randomized controlled trials conducted in any age group, published in English language since 2008 reporting impact of different CVC designs or materials on thrombosis were included, to capture studies that reflect contemporary products and practice. Cochrane systematic review methodology was followed, including independent study selection and data extraction. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A narrative synthesis and meta-analysis in RevMan were conducted.

RESULTS

From a possible 232 studies, nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Four studies (n = 1,320) assessed different catheter materials; four studies (n = 591) compared different CVC designs, and one study (n = 150) evaluated impact of combined design and material on outcomes. Meta-analysis demonstrated that neither catheter material nor design alone or in combination had a significant impact on thrombosis (RR: 0.98 [95% CI 0.87, 1.11]). Different catheter materials and design also had no significant impact on occlusion or CRBSI. Studies were of mixed quality overall.

LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION

Different CVC materials and designs were not associated with a reduction in the risk of either catheter-related thrombosis or infection. Overall reporting and small sample sizes make it difficult to draw firm conclusions. Larger, quality randomized trials are required to provide evidence about the possible merits of innovative catheter design and materials on patient outcomes.

A comparison of hydrophobic polyurethane and polyurethane peripherally inserted central catheter: results from a feasibility randomized controlled trial

Background

To evaluate the feasibility of an efficacy trial comparing a hydrophobic polyurethane peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) with a standard polyurethane PICC.

Methods

This pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted between May 2017 and February 2018. Adult participants (n = 111) were assigned to hydrophobic polyurethane PICC with proximal valve (intervention) or a polyurethane PICC with external clamp (standard care). Primary outcome was trial feasibility including PICC failure. Secondary outcomes were central line-associated bloodstream infection, local infection, occlusion, thrombosis, fracture and dislodgement, phlebitis, local or systemic allergic reaction, and PICC dwell time.

Results

All feasibility outcomes were achieved, apart from eligibility criteria. In total, 338 patients were screened, 138 were eligible (41%), and of these 111 were randomised (80%). Patients received the allocated PICC in 106 (95%) insertions. No patients withdrew from the study and there was no missing data. PICC failure was 24% (13/55) in the intervention group and 22% (12/55) in the standard care group (p = 0.820). PICC failure per 1000 PICC days was 16.3 in the intervention group and 18.4 in the control group (p = 0.755). The average dwell time was 12 days in the intervention and 8 days in the control group.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates the feasibility of an efficacy trial of PICC materials in an adult population, once adjustments were made to include not only in-patients, but also patients being discharged to the Hospital in the Home service.

Trial registration

Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616001578493. Prospectively registered on 16 November 2016. The trial protocol was published a priori (Kleidon et al., Vasc Access 3:15–21, 2017).

Nursing Interventions to Reduce Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Occlusion for Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Literature

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients are considered the most at risk of the consequences of catheter occlusion. Therefore, nursing interventions that can effectively reduce the occlusion of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) lines must be identified to ensure a smooth treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate nursing interventions to minimize PICC line occlusion and make recommended measures for preventing or decreasing occlusion and abnormal extubation.

METHODS

Studies about PICC occlusion that were published up to January 2017 were searched and screened in PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct (Elsevier), EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Chinese databases CNKI and Wanfang. Two independent reviewers screened the literature in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, assessed the quality of the included studies, and extracted the data. Further meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials were included. Meta-analysis revealed that education for nurses (relative risk, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.51; P < .00001) was significantly associated with PICC occlusion, whereas PICC type (relative risk, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-1.15; P = .12) was not significantly associated with PICC occlusion. The solution to washing pipes and the PICC insertion techniques were descriptively analyzed to reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

This study determined the correlation of PICC occlusion with the nurses' knowledge and skills, PICC types, flushing liquid and methods, and insertion techniques.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The findings of this study can serve as a guide for clinical work and for developing targeted measures to reduce occlusion.

Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Postinsertion Complications: A Retrospective Study

PICC offers safe intravenous access for medium- to long-term use with inpatients. There is no association between overall complication rates and PICC material type. Oncology status is the strongest predictor of complications.

Randomized controlled trials in central vascular access devices: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for central venous access devices, however, high complication rates remain. Scoping reviews map the available evidence and demonstrate evidence deficiencies to focus ongoing research priorities.

METHOD

A scoping review (January 2006-December 2015) of randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of interventions to improve central venous access device outcomes; including peripherally inserted central catheters, non-tunneled, tunneled and totally implanted venous access catheters. MeSH terms were used to undertake a systematic search with data extracted by two independent researchers, using a standardized data extraction form.

RESULTS

In total, 178 trials were included (78 non-tunneled [44%]; 40 peripherally inserted central catheters [22%]; 20 totally implanted [11%]; 12 tunneled [6%]; 6 non-specified [3%]; and 22 combined device trials [12%]). There were 119 trials (68%) involving adult participants only, with 18 (9%) pediatric and 20 (11%) neonatal trials. Insertion-related themes existed in 38% of trials (67 RCTs), 35 RCTs (20%) related to post-insertion patency, with fewer trials on infection prevention (15 RCTs, 8%), education (14RCTs, 8%), and dressing and securement (12 RCTs, 7%). There were 46 different study outcomes reported, with the most common being infection outcomes (161 outcomes; 37%), with divergent definitions used for catheter-related bloodstream and other infections.

CONCLUSION

More high quality randomized trials across central venous access device management are necessary, especially in dressing and securement and patency. These can be encouraged by having more studies with multidisciplinary team involvement and consumer engagement. Additionally, there were extensive gaps within population sub-groups, particularly in tunneled devices, and in pediatrics and neonates. Finally, outcome definitions need to be unified for results to be meaningful and comparable across studies.

Plasma transfusions prior to insertion of central lines for people with abnormal coagulation

BACKGROUND

The insertion of central venous catheters (CVCs) may be associated with peri- and post-procedural bleeding. People who require a central line often have disorders of coagulation as a result of their underlying illness, co-morbidities or the effects of treatment. Clinical practice in some institutions is to mitigate the risk of bleeding in these patients by prophylactically transfusing fresh frozen plasma (FFP) in order to correct clotting factor deficiencies prior to central line insertion. However, FFP transfusion is not without risk, and it remains unclear whether this intervention is associated with reduced rates of bleeding or other clinically-meaningful outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of different prophylactic plasma transfusion regimens prior to central line insertion in people with abnormal coagulation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 3), PubMed (e-publications only), Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946), Ovid Embase (from 1974), the Transfusion Evidence Library (from 1950) and ongoing trial databases to 1 March 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs involving transfusions of plasma to prevent bleeding in people of any age with abnormal coagulation requiring insertion of a central venous catheter, published in English.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four trials eligible for inclusion, of which three are ongoing. We did not exclude any studies because they were not published in English.The included study randomised 81 adults in intensive care whose INR (International Normalised Ratio) was greater than or equal to 1.5 to no FFP or to a single dose of 12 mL/kg FFP prior to undergoing central venous catheterisation (58 participants) or other invasive procedure (23 participants). It is the subgroup of 58 adults undergoing CVC insertion that were included in this review, the study authors provided unpublished data for this review's outcomes.The quality of the evidence was low or very low across different outcomes according to the GRADE methodology. The included study was at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding of participants and personnel and imbalance in the number of participants who had liver disease between study arms.There was insufficient evidence to determine a difference in major procedure-related bleeding within 24 hours (one RCT; 58 participants; no events in either study arm, very low-quality evidence). We are very uncertain whether FFP reduces minor procedure-related bleeding within 24 hours of the study (one RCT; 58 participants, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.12 to 3.70, very low-quality evidence).No studies were found that looked at: all-cause mortality; the proportion of participants receiving plasma or red cell transfusions; serious adverse reactions (transfusion or line-related complications); number of days in hospital; change in INR; or quality of life.The three ongoing studies are still recruiting participants (expected recruitment: up to 355 participants in total). and are due to be completed by February 2018.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is only very limited evidence from one RCT to inform the decision whether or not to administer prophylactic plasma prior to central venous catheterisation for people with abnormal coagulation. It is not possible from the current RCT evidence to recommend whether or not prophylactic plasma transfusion is beneficial or harmful in this situation. The three ongoing RCTs will not be able to answer this review's questions, because they are small studies and do not address all of the comparisons included in this review (355 participants in total). To detect an increase in the proportion of participants who had major bleeding from 1 in 100 to 2 in 100 would require a study containing at least 4634 participants (80% power, 5% significance).

A comparison of silicone and polyurethane PICC lines and postinsertion complication rates: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To determine postinsertion complication rate for peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs), in particular the difference between silicone and polyurethane lines in general population groups as well as oncology and non-oncology patient groups.

METHODS

A systematic review of prospective and retrospective studies in the English language between January 2000 and October 2013 focusing on postinsertion complication rates for PICCs in the adult population. Joanna Briggs Institute tools were used to extract data from the final 19 articles with information collated relating to catheter type, patient type, overall complication rate, rates of infection, occlusion, dislodgment, phlebitis, thrombus and rupture.

RESULTS

Overall, the PICCs complication rates ranged from 8 to 50%. Although both lines saw similar overall rates upon closer observation, the strengths and weaknesses of both lines are shown.Polyurethane PICC lines were found to provide lower rates of infection, dislodgment, thrombus and rupture complications.Mixed results were found with catheter line occlusions, overall averages showing polyurethane lines slightly higher rates than silicone. Oncology patients however saw opposite results.Phlebitis rates saw the largest division among the postinsertion complication rates, with 6.7% more phlebitis in the general patient group and 14.5% in the oncology group more for those with polyurethane PICC lines compared with the silicone.

CONCLUSIONS

Both silicone and polyurethane PICC lines exhibit nearly identical overall average postinsertion compilation rates; however, it is the type of complications experienced that differ. Overall, oncology patients can expect to experience higher levels of postinsertion complications.

A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of three different types of Valved and Non-Valved Peripherally inserted Central Catheters

Purpose

Few randomized studies have investigated the impact of valved and non-valved power-injectable peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in terms of incidence of occlusion, infection, malfunction and venous thrombosis.

Methods

We have prospectively compared three types of third-generation polyurethane PICCs. One hundred and eighty adult patients candidate to chemotherapy were randomized into three groups: power-injectable PICCs with Solo-2 proximal valve (Bard); power-injectable PICCs with PASV (Pressure Activated Safety Valve) proximal valve (Navilyst); and non-valved power-injectable PICCs (Medcomp). All PICCs were single lumen 4Fr, inserted according to a well-defined protocol - maximal barrier precautions, ultrasound guidance, intracavitary electrocardiography (IC-ECG), and so on - and managed according to the recommendations of the most recent guidelines (antisepsis with 2% chlorhexidine, transparent dressing, sutureless device, strict ‘scrub the hub’ policy, neutral displacement needle-free connectors and so on). All catheters were flushed with 10 ml saline before and after each infusion, or with 20 ml saline after blood sampling or infusion of blood products. No heparin was used.

Results

We detected no complications at insertion; no PICC-related bloodstream infections; no dislocations; five cases of transient occlusion and two cases of persistent withdrawal occlusion, evenly distributed among the groups; one episode of complete irreversible obstruction (group A); four episodes of asymptomatic peripheral venous thrombosis; one episode of symptomatic, severe central vein thrombosis (group B). In 31% of PICCs in group A (19/61) and in 65% of group B (39/60), difficulties with gravity infusion were reported; three PICCs of group A were complicated by rupture of the intravascular tract during pump infusion. Five PICCs were removed because of complications, four in group A (one obstruction; three ruptures) and one in group B (central venous thrombosis).

Conclusion

We found no clinical advantages of valved vs. non-valved PICCs.