Surveillance of infectious complications associated with central venous access devices in children with haemophilia

Model of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Emicizumab Prophylaxis Treatment for Persons with Hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Hemophilia A (HA) can result in bleeding events because of low or absent clotting factor VIII (FVIII). Prophylactic treatment for severe HA includes replacement FVIII infusions and emicizumab, a bispecific factor IXa- and factor X-directed antibody.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an economic model to predict the short- and long-term clinical and economic outcomes of prophylaxis with emicizumab versus short-acting recombinant FVIII among persons with HA in the United States.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to compare clinical outcomes and costs of emicizumab versus FVIII prophylaxis among persons with severe HA from U.S. payer and societal perspectives. Patients started prophylaxis at age 1 year in the base case. Mutually exclusive health states considered were "no arthropathy," "arthropathy," "surgery," and "death." Serious adverse events, breakthrough bleeds, and inhibitor development were simulated throughout the modeled time horizon. In addition to the prophylaxis drug costs, patients could incur other direct costs related to breakthrough bleeds treatment, serious adverse events, development of inhibitors, arthropathy, and orthopedic surgery. Indirect costs associated with productivity loss (i.e., missed work or disabilities) were applied for adults. Model inputs were obtained from the HAVEN 3 trial, published literature, and expert opinion. The model used a lifetime horizon, and results for 1 year and 5 years were also reported. Deterministic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were conducted to assess robustness of the model.

RESULTS

Over a lifetime horizon, the cumulative number of all treated bleeds and joint bleeds avoided on emicizumab versus FVIII prophylaxis were 278.2 and 151.7, respectively. Correspondingly, arthropathy (mean age at onset: 12.9 vs. 5.4 years) and FVIII inhibitor development (mean age at development: 13.9 vs. 1.1 years) were delayed. Total direct and indirect costs were lower for emicizumab versus FVIII prophylaxis for all modeled time horizons ($97,159 vs. $331,610 at 1 year; $603,146 vs. $1,459,496 at 5 years; and $15,238,072 vs. $22,820,281 over a lifetime horizon). The sensitivity analyses indicated that clinical outcomes were sensitive to efficacy inputs, while economic outcomes were driven by the discount rate, dosing schedules, and treatments after inhibitor development. Results for moderate to severe patients were consistent with findings in the severe HA population.

CONCLUSIONS

The model suggests that emicizumab prophylaxis confers additional clinical benefits, resulting in a lower number of bleeding events and delayed onset of arthropathy and inhibitor development across all time assessment horizons. Compared with short-acting recombinant FVIII, emicizumab prophylaxis leads to superior patient outcomes and cost savings from U.S. payer and societal perspectives.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this study was provided by Genentech. Raimundo and Patel are employees of Genentech and own stock or stock options. Zhou, Han, Ji, Fang, Zhong, and Betts are employees of Analysis Group, which received consultancy fees from Genentech for conducting this study. Mahajerin received consultancy fees from Genentech for work on this study. Portions of this research were presented as a poster at the 2018 American Society of Hematology Conference; December 1-4, 2018; San Diego, CA.

Central venous access devices in patients with hemophilia

Hemophilia is a hereditary disorder in which the major clinical manifestation is bleeding into the joints, muscles, internal organs and the CNS, often without any obvious trauma. Bleeding can be fatal as in the case of CNS hemorrhage, or severely debilitating following repeated bleeding into joints that results in crippling arthritis. Treatment for hemophilia includes the intravenous administration of clotting factor concentrates to replace the missing or defective protein. Venous access is therefore critical to the treatment of hemophilia and the prevention of complications due to bleeding. According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, approximately half of patients less than 16 years of age and one-third of all patients with hemophilia receive regular prophylactic injections of clotting factor concentrates. Prophylaxis, or the regular scheduled administration of antihemophilic factor concentrate, is effective in preventing bleeding. Among those patients with severe disease, in the absence of prophylaxis, approximately 13 bleeds, including nine joint hemorrhages, occur annually. In contrast, when prophylaxis is administered, the annual number of total and joint bleeds decreases to five and three, respectively. One of the major barriers to the more wide-spread use of prophylaxis is venous access. While peripheral venipuncture remains the first choice for venous access, central venous access devices are frequently used to facilitate repeated and/or urgent administration of clotting factor concentrates. The advantages of central venous access devices are well recognized in certain treatment regimens such as prophylaxis and immune tolerance therapy, as well as certain patient groups such as young children in whom venipuncture is often difficult and traumatic, and adults with scarred veins. Central venous access devices also allow earlier commencement of both home treatment and prophylaxis. The goal of this review is to discuss the different types of central venous access devices and their role in the management of hemophilia to provide practitioners that care for patients with hemophilia with the necessary information to make sound therapeutic recommendations to their patients.

Emergency department visits in children with hemophilia

BACKGROUND

The pediatric emergency department (ED) management of bleeding and other complications of hemophilia constitutes an increasingly important component of hemophilia therapy. This retrospective study examined the overall ED use by children with hemophilia in a single center, with a particular aim to investigate visits related to injury or bleeding, and those related to blood stream infection in patients with a central venous catheter (CVC).

METHODS

Electronic medical records of patients with hemophilia presenting to Children's Hospital of Michigan ED were reviewed. Different categories of ED visits over a 5-year period (January 2006-December 2010) were examined.

RESULTS

There were 536 ED visits from 84 male patients (median age 4 years, range 0-21) with hemophilia over the 5-year period. The reasons for ED visits were: injury or bleeding (61.2%); suspected CVC-related infection (11.8%); causes unrelated to hemophilia (19.2%); and routine clotting factor infusion (7.8%). Eighteen visits from six patients were secondary to injury or bleeding in a patient not yet diagnosed with hemophilia. An intracranial hemorrhage was detected in five visits. Overall, 5.4% of all visits represented distinct episodes of bloodstream infection.

CONCLUSION

The pediatric ED is an indispensable component of the overall hemophilia care, because: (1) patients with potentially lethal problems such as ICH or CVC-related infection may present to the ED for their initial management; (2) previously undiagnosed patients with hemophilia may also present to the ED for their first bleeding episodes, initiating the diagnostic investigations; (3) the ED provides after-hours treatment service for many episodes of injury or bleeding, and also for clotting factor infusion.

Central venous access device-related infections in patients with haemophilia

AIMS

Fully implantable central venous access devices (CVADs) can offer long-term reliable venous access to facilitate regular factor replacement therapy in haemophilia. However, CVAD-related infection remains a major deterrent to the optimal use of CVAD in this population. This report represents the first review of CVAD use in haemophilia in Australia and aims to examine the rate of complications including CVAD-related infections.

METHODS

A retrospective review of medical records was conducted of all haemophilic patients with fully implantable CVADs at the Royal Children's Hospital (RCH), Melbourne, between 1 June 1992 and 30 June 2009. CVAD-related bloodstream infection was defined based on the guidelines from the Centre of Disease Control and Victoria National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance. To further enhance identification of CVAD-related infection in this study, a third criterion of 'suspected infection' was added by the authors.

RESULTS

Eighty-one CVADs in 56 patients were managed at the RCH during this time period resulting in a combined study period of 94 756 CVAD days. Median age at first CVAD insertion = 2.16 years (range 0.66 to 13.98 years). CVADs were inserted predominantly due to difficult venous access and prophylaxis initiation (70.4%). Median life-span of a CVAD was 1227 days, equivalent to 3.36 years (n = 50; range 0.22 to 9.44 years). Fifty-seven CVAD-related infections occurred in 37 CVADs (46.3%) in 29 patients (51.8%). Overall incidence of confirmed CVAD-related bloodstream infection = 0.42 per 1000 CVAD days (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.31 to 0.58 per 1000 CVAD days) and indicate better performance compared with the published benchmark of 0.66 per 1000 CVAD days (0.44 to 0.97 per 1000 CVAD days). The incidence of both confirmed (criteria 1, 2) and suspected (criterion 3) CVAD-related infection is 0.60 per 1000 CVAD days (95% CI: 0.46 to 0.78), which is comparable to the international benchmark. The majority of CVAD-related infections (73.7%) were successfully treated with intravenous antimicrobials without necessitating CVAD removal. Klebsiella pneumoniae was the most common organism found in positive blood cultures.

CONCLUSION

CVAD-related infection in this Australian population was comparable to rates described in the medical literature. Ongoing surveillance for infection rates is important to provide an up-to-date assessment of risks associated with CVAD use in this population.

How I treat inhibitors in haemophilia

The management of patients with inhibitors is the greatest challenge facing haemophilia health professionals. Immune tolerance induction (ITI) can be successful in eliminating the inhibitor in the majority of patients, provided it is started soon after the inhibitor develops and the titre of the inhibitor is <10 BU at commencement of ITI. Acute bleeding is treated using one of two bypassing agents, which exhibit similar efficacy and safety. Surgery in inhibitor patients is challenging and should only be carried out in experienced centres.

The principal results of the International Immune Tolerance Study: a randomized dose comparison

The International Immune Tolerance Study was a multicenter, prospective, randomized comparison of high-dose (HD; 200 IU/kg/d) and low-dose (LD; 50 IU/kg 3 times/week) factor VIII regimens in 115 “good-risk,” severe high-titer inhibitor hemophilia A subjects. Sixty-six of 115 subjects reached the defined study end points: success, n = 46 (69.7%); partial response, n = 3 (4.5%); and failure, n = 17 (25.8%). Successes did not differ between treatment arms (24 of 58 LD vs 22/57 HD, P = .909). The times taken to achieve a negative titer (P = .027), a normal recovery (P = .002), and tolerance (P = .116, nonsignificant) were shorter with the HD immune tolerance induction (ITI). Peak historical (P = .026) and on-ITI (P = .002) titers were correlated inversely with success, but only peak titer on ITI predicted outcome in a multivariate analysis (P = .002). LD subjects bled more often (odds ratio, 2.2; P = .0019). The early bleed rate/month was 0.62 (LD) and 0.28 (HD; P = .000 24), decreasing by 90% once negative titers were achieved. Bleeding was absent in 8 of 58 LD versus 21 of 57 HD subjects (P = .0085). One hundred twenty-four central catheter infections were reported in 41 subjects (19 LD); infection frequency did not differ between the treatment arms. Neither bleeding nor infection influenced outcome. Although it was stopped early for futility and safety considerations, this trial contributed valuable data toward evidence-based ITI practice.

Venous access in haemophilic children: choice and management

Current haemophilia treatment in children is based on regular intravenous infusions of concentrates for prolonged periods, according to prophylaxis regimens or immune tolerance induction treatment, in cases of inhibitor development. Therefore, a stable and uncomplicated venous access is required and as such peripheral veins represent the preferred option. However, frequent infusions in the home setting can be problematic in very young children and for this reason, central venous access devices (CVADs) have been widely used to improve treatment feasibility. Unfortunately CVADs' use is associated with a high rate of complications, and infections and thrombotic occlusion can influence treatment outcome by causing unwanted treatment interruption. CVADs can be grouped into three main categories: external non-tunnelled, external tunnelled and fully implantable devices known as ports. The management of CVADs at home often represents a challenge because a strict adherence to sterile procedures is required. Indeed, the incidence of infections with ports is much lower than that reported for external devices; however, ports carry the inconvenience of needle sticks. More recently, arteriovenous fistula was shown to be a suitable alternative to CVADs because it is easy to use and is associated with a lower rate of complication.

Side-effects and venous access issues with immune tolerance therapy

Immune tolerance therapy (ITT) is the most effective approach to eradicate inhibitors in patients with haemophilia who develop high-titre inhibitors. Yet ITT is associated with many adverse side-effects. Rarely, adverse side-effects arise from the various factor concentrates that patients on ITT receive or from adjuvant immunosuppressive agents used during ITT. Most adverse side-effects of ITT are related to the need for frequent and repetitive venous access, which often results in the need for central venous access devices (CVAD). These devices greatly facilitate the ability to give repeated doses of factor concentrates to patients and are particularly useful in young children who often have small and poorly functioning peripheral veins. These devices can become infected, can malfunction or can lead to venous thrombosis. These complications, although rarely causing mortality, may lead to significant morbidity including the need to have the devices removed and new ones inserted. As well, such CVAD complications may lead to reduced effectiveness of ITT through interruptions in ITT.

Central venous access devices for paediatric patients with haemophilia: a single-institution experience

Use of a central venous access device (CVAD) can facilitate early introduction of home-based infusion of factor concentrate for long-term prophylaxis or immune tolerance therapy in children with bleeding disorders. The aim was to review outcomes associated with use of CVAD. Retrospective review of paediatric patients with bleeding disorders was observed at the Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Hemophilia Center. Thirty-seven CVAD were placed in 18 patients (haemophilia A [n = 15], type 3 von Willebrand disease [n = 2] and haemophilia B [n = 1]). Follow-up was for 45 952 CVAD days, and median time that CVAD remained in place was 1361 days per device. Factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors were present in 4 of the 15 patients. Ten CVAD-related infections occurred (median, 672 days; range, 72-1941 days), of which six were in one patient with FVIII inhibitors. Overall infection rate was 0.22 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.40) per 1000 CVAD days, with 0.11 infections in patients without FVIII inhibitors compared with a pooled incidence of 0.66 (95% CI, 0.44-0.97) reported in the literature. Indications for removal of 27 CVAD were blockage, change to peripheral venous access, catheter displacement, infection, leak in the port septum, short catheter and skin erosion. No clinically apparent thrombosis or sequelae of thrombosis were observed. Infection is the most common complication associated with CVAD use and is increased in patients who have inhibitors. The low rate of clinically apparent thrombosis reflects our practice of not screening for thrombosis. The low infection rate reflects our practice of using and reinforcing the aseptic technique.

Barriers to primary prophylaxis in haemophilic children: the issue of the venous access

Modem treatment for hemophilic children is based on prophylaxis and immune tolerance induction (ITI). Both treatment regimens are based on frequent infusions at early ages, therefore an adequate venous access is essential. Peripheral veins represent the best option, however, different solutions, as central venous access devices (CVADs) and arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs), can be adopted if needed. CVADs have been used in hemophiliacs, however their survival is affected by infectious complications. Among CVADs, fully implantable devices are usually preferred to external lines due to a lower infectious risk. The limited survival of CVADs may have a relevant impact on treatment outcome, especially in case of ITI where treatment interruptions are counterproductive. To overcome such drawbacks, internal AVF has been considered as an alternative option owing to a lower rate of infectious complications. Moreover, AVF is easy to use in the home setting and well accepted by children. Possible complications not preventing AVF use are postoperative hematoma and transient symptoms of distal ischemia; one case of symptomatic thrombosis has been reported so far. Long-term complications include loss of patency, aneurysmatic dilatation and, rarely, limb dysmetria and a regular follow-up is mandatory to allow early remedial intervention. Surgical dismantlement of AVF is recommended as soon as transition to peripheral veins is possible.

Tissue plasminogen activator to prevent central venous access device infections: a systematic review of central venous access catheter thrombosis, infection and thromboprophylaxis

The recent unequivocal demonstration that prophylaxis, three to four weekly factor infusions, is effective in preventing joint disease in children with haemophilia, has provided impetus to initiate prophylaxis early in such children. Yet, nearly a quarter (22%) of the 83% who required central venous access devices for factor infusion developed central venous access catheter (CVAD)-related infection. This limitation of CVAD use prevents many families from initiating prophylaxis. The frequent occurrence of local thrombosis accompanying CVAD-related infection in surgical patients and autopsy cases, the thrombogenic plastic CVAD surfaces, and local clot formation at the insertion site, suggest the potential role of thrombolytic agents in preventing these infections. Yet, correlation between CVAD-related infection and local thrombosis in children with haemophilia are lacking, and thromboprophylaxis to prevent CVAD-related infection is controversial. Tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA), a recombinant serine protease glycoprotein that lyses plasmin-bound fibrin and is safe and effective in the treatment of occluded catheters, has not been evaluated in the prevention of these infections. We performed a literature review of CVAD-related infection, CVAD-related thrombosis, and thromboprophylaxis studies to evaluate the role of t-PA in the prevention of these infections in children with haemophilia. Metanalysis of published thromboprophylaxis trials demonstrate current prophylaxis regimens do not prevent CVAD infection, and further, that thrombosis and infection do not necessarily occur simultaneously. Pilot data demonstrate CVAD infection reduction in haemophilic children by monthly t-PA in 18 haemophilic children, suggesting the potential role of t-PA in CVAD infection prevention. Clinical trials to evaluate t-PA in CVAD infection prevention are justified.

The risk associated with indwelling catheters in children with haemophilia

Infections are the most frequent complications associated with the use of central venous lines (CVLs) in children with haemophilia. Several retrospective studies that include data from a substantial number of patients have reported approximately 0.2-0.3 infections per 1000 catheter-days (mainly Port-A-Cath). Some studies have shown a much higher frequency of infections, 1-2/1000 catheter-days. The most plausible explanations, for the difference seen in frequency of infections with Port-A-Caths, are probably related to the protocol used for the device care and the quality of education and the compliance of the users, whether these are parents or health-care professionals. The figures are low for clinically apparent thrombosis in the larger series on record, but routine venograms were not performed in most of these series. In studies, where this has been performed, a high frequency of abnormalities (>50%) on venograms have been seen in some series but not in others. Despite obvious potential risks with CVLs, they are useful in many cases and facilitate the treatment of a serious disorder. With careful guidelines and surveillance protocols, the risk of complications should be reduced in the future.

Management guidelines for mucopolysaccharidosis VI

Mucopolysaccharidosis VI (Maroteaux-Lamy syndrome) is a lysosomal storage disease that is characterized by systemic clinical manifestations and significant functional impairment. Diagnosis and management are often challenging because of the considerable variability in symptom presentation and rate of progression. The optimal standard of care should be based on evidence from randomized, controlled trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and expert opinion. In support of this goal, comprehensive management guidelines have been drafted by an international group of experts in the management of patients with mucopolysaccharidosis VI. The guidelines provide a detailed outline of disease manifestations by body system, recommendations for regular assessments, and an overview of current treatment options.

International workshop on immune tolerance induction: consensus recommendations

Although immune tolerance induction (ITI) has been used for 30 years to eliminate inhibitors and restore normal factor pharmacokinetics in patients with hemophilia, there is a paucity of scientific evidence to guide therapeutic decision-making. In an effort to provide direction for physicians and hemophilia treatment center staff members, an international panel of hemophilia opinion leaders met to develop consensus recommendations for ITI in patients with severe and mild hemophilia A and hemophilia B. These recommendations draw on the available published literature and the collective clinical experience of the group and are rated based on the level of supporting evidence.

Immune tolerance therapy for factor VIII inhibitors: moving from empiricism to an evidence-based approach

Currently, the only proven strategy for achieving antigen-specific tolerance to factor VIII (FVIII) is immune tolerance induction (ITI) therapy. This paper discusses our current knowledge of the host and treatment factors, as well as supportive care initiatives, known or suspected to influence the outcome of ITI in the treatment of inhibitors arising in patients with severe hemophilia A. Among these, questions surrounding the choice of therapeutic product and/or dosing regimen generate the most controversy, given the lack of a definitive evidence-based approach to either. Furthermore, the potential for central venous access device (CVAD) and intercurrent bleeding complications to impact the ultimate success of ITI remains unclear. The ongoing clinical trials designed to further clarify several of these polarizing issues are reviewed. This paper also explores the current and future role of immune modulation in possible salvage, ancillary or primary alternative tolerance induction strategies. The special cases of low titer/ responding inhibitors and inhibitors developing in mild hemophilia A patients are considered. Finally, this paper summarizes the currently recommended approach to ITI and makes the case for a move from empiric therapeutics to a risk-stratified evidence-based approach to FVIII inhibitor eradication.

Immune tolerance: critical issues of factor dose, purity and treatment complications

The current practice of immune tolerance induction (ITI) therapy has been largely influenced by the results of small institutional studies and three large registries. However, many questions remain. Successful outcome predictors for ITI in haemophilia A have been suggested by the analyses of two of these registries. Among these predictors, factor VIII (FVIII) dose/dosing regimen remains a controversial outcome parameter, demonstrating a strong direct relationship to ITI success in the international registry and a weaker inverse relationship in the North American registry. There is an international multicentre prospective randomized trial underway to further study the role of FVIII dose in successful ITI induction in a good risk haemophilia A inhibitor patient cohort. FVIII purity also remains an unproved ITI outcome predictor. Institutional experience with von-Willebrand-factor-containing products has suggested its therapeutic advantage in both inhibitor development and eradication. The International ITI Study, although not designed to answer this particular question, may be able to determine an impact on outcome depending on the final distribution of investigator choice of product among the study subjects. Much less is known about the influence of factor IX (FIX) dose and purity on ITI success in haemophilia B. Importantly, nephrotic syndrome has been a major determinant of ITI failure in FIX inhibitor patients, particularly those with the allergic phenotype. Unfortunately, large prospective randomized trials in this group will not be feasible. Rather, we will have to rely on prospectively collected registry data to build our knowledge base of inhibitors and ITI in haemophilia B.

Tratamento endovascular de pseudo-aneurisma da artéria subclávia em criança hemofílica

O uso de cateteres venosos centrais em pacientes hemofílicos é muito freqüente, devido às próprias características terapêuticas da doença. As complicações desses procedimentos, tais como pseudo-aneurisma, geralmente são mais graves nesses pacientes. A correção cirúrgica do pseudo-aneurisma que acomete a artéria subclávia constitui um dos maiores desafios da cirurgia vascular. Em pacientes hemofílicos, à dificuldade habitual de exposição cirúrgica somam-se os problemas de alteração no processo normal de coagulação. Como alternativa ao tratamento cirúrgico convencional, a utilização de técnicas endovasculares constitui uma solução segura e com bons resultados.

Fatal central venous catheter-related infection in haemophilia

Central venous catheters (CVC) are frequently used in children with haemophilia to deliver factor infusions for the treatment or prophylaxis of bleeding. Complications of CVCs in patients with haemophilia include thrombosis and infection. We report a young boy with severe haemophilia A and an inhibitor who developed disseminated Staphylococcus aureus infection most likely related to a CVC. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of fatal sepsis secondary to a CVC in a patient with haemophilia.

Bacterial contamination of central venous catheters during insertion: a double blind randomised controlled trial

Static electricity within sterile packaging may result in bacterial contamination of central venous catheters (CVCs) prior to insertion. To prevent this, some surgeons inject saline into the pack before opening it. This trial was designed to determine the effect of this procedure. A double blind randomised controlled trial of 47 CVCs comparing injection of 2 ml of sterile saline into the pack prior to opening with no injection was performed. Five centimetre lengths cut from the tip of the catheter before and after subcutaneous tunnelling were sent for microbiological culture. Eight catheters (17%) showed evidence of bacterial contamination prior to insertion into the vein. Two (4.2%) were contaminated prior to tunnelling and seven (14.9%) afterwards. One catheter was contaminated before and after tunnelling. All but one of the contaminating bacteria were coagulase negative staphylococci. There was no significant difference in the contamination rate between catheters from packs that had been injected (5/25) and those that had not (3/22), P = 0.56. Just under one-fifth of the catheters were contaminated with bacteria prior to insertion into the vein but this was not influenced by prior injection of saline into the pack. We conclude that there is no evidence to support the practice of injecting the catheter pack prior to opening.

Consensus recommendations for use of central venous access devices in haemophilia

Venous access is essential for delivery of haemophilia factor concentrate. Wherever possible, peripheral veins remain the route of choice, and the use of central venous access devices (CVADs) should be limited to cases of clear need in patients with caregivers able to exercise diligence in CVAD care and should continue no longer than necessary. CVADs are of recognized value for repeated administration of coagulation factors in haemophilia, particularly for prophylaxis and immune tolerance therapy and in young children. Evidence to guide best practices has been fragmentary, and standardized methods for CVAD usage have yet to be established. We have developed management recommendations based upon available published evidence as well as extensive clinical experience. These recommendations address patient and CVAD selection; CVAD placement, care and removal; caregiver/patient guidance; and complications, including infection and thrombosis. In the absence of inhibitors, ports are recommended, primarily because of fewer associated infections than with external catheters. For patients with inhibitors, ports also appear to be associated with fewer infections. Infection is the most frequent complication, and recommendations to prevent and treat infections are supported by extensive clinical data and experience. Strict adherence to handwashing and aseptic technique are essential elements of catheter care. Evidence-based data regarding the detection and treatment of CVAD-related thrombotic complications are limited. Caregiver education is an integral part of CVAD use and the procedural practices of users should be regularly re-assessed. These recommendations provide a basis for sound current CVAD practice and are expected to undergo further refinements as new evidence is compiled and clinical experience is gained.

Central venous access devices in haemophilia

Central venous access devices (CVADs) can facilitate repeated and/or urgent administration of coagulation factors in haemophilic patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of complication rates and risk factors for poor outcome. Forty-eight studies with a total of 2704 patients and 2973 CVADs were included. The primary indications for CVADs were immune tolerance therapy (34.9% of patients), difficult venous access (31.8%) and prophylaxis (29.1%). Fully implanted CVADs were employed in 77.4% of cases and external CVADs in 22.6%. A total of 1190 infections were reported, and the pooled incidence of infection was 0.66 per 1000 CVAD days [confidence interval (CI), 0.44-0.97 per 1000 CVAD days]. Among patients developing infection, the pooled time to first infection was 295 days (CI, 181-479 days). Presence of inhibitors was an independent risk factor for infection with an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 1.67 (CI, 1.15-2.43). Infection was less likely in patients >6 years of age (IRR, 0.46; CI, 0.27-0.79) and recipients of fully implanted CVADs (IRR, 0.31; CI, 0.12-0.86). Available information on thrombosis was limited, with only 55 cases being reported. Eventually, 31.3% of CVADs were removed, and infection was the reason for removal in 69.9% of cases and thrombosis in 4.1%. The pooled time period CVADs remained indwelling prior to removal or the expiration of the study observation period was 578 days per CVAD (CI, 456-733 days per CVAD). CVADs can confer major benefits in patients with haemophilia requiring long-term venous access, and serious complications are rare.