Choice and management of vascular access in the context of COVID-19 outbreak in Italy: Recommendations from clinical practice

Subcutaneously anchored securement for peripherally inserted central catheters: Immediate, early, and late complications

BACKGROUND

An adequate stabilization of a vascular device is an important part of insertion bundles and is an effective strategy in reducing complications. Dislodgment has a relevant clinical impact and an increase in healthcare costs.

METHOD

We have retrospectively investigated the safety and efficacy of Subcutaneously Anchored Securement (SAS) for Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters (PICC) in cancer patients.

RESULTS

We analyzed 639 patients who had a PICC inserted and secured with SAS, over the past 3 years (2018-2020). No immediate complications during SAS placement were reported. In the first 24-48 h, a slight local ecchymosis was reported in 24 cases with rapid spontaneous resolution. No cases of bleeding or hematoma of the exit site were reported. The total number of catheter days was 93078. Dislodgment occurred only in seven cases (1.1%). In 16 patients, the PICC was removed because of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI): the overall incidence of CRBSI was 0.17 per 1000 catheter days. Symptomatic venous thrombosis was documented in 12 patients (1.9%) and treated with low molecular weight heparin without PICC removal. We had no cases of irreversible lumen occlusion. In 17 patients, local discomfort-including device-related pressure ulcers and painful inflammation-was reported: these cases were treated without SAS removal or PICC removal.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective analysis, subcutaneously anchored securement of PICCs was a safe and effective strategy for reducing the risk of dislodgment.

The impact of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic outbreak on the vascular access team operations after conversion to COVID-19 dedicated hospital

BACKGROUND

On February 21 2020, in Schiavonia Hospital occurred the first death by COVID-19 in Italy and since this date SARS-CoV-2 caused more than 100,000 deaths in our country. Our hospital was immediately closed and re-opened after 15 days as a reference Covid Hospital. Among services involved in a process of destruction and rebirth there was also the Vascular Access Team.

METHODS

We analyzed our Vascular Access Team activity comparing data from the first month (March) in which basically it did not work and data from the following month (April) in which we began to re-build the Team adapting it to the new reality.

RESULTS

In all patients admitted to Intensive Care Unit a Centrally Inserted Central Catheter multilumen was placed, but in March only 5.5% of patients admitted to Medicine-Sub-intensive Unit had a catheter different from the short peripheral cannula while in April it was possible to guarantee a more suitable catheter 31.7% of patients admitted to Medicine-Sub-intensive Unit (p < 0.000). In April, compared to March, a significant higher number of Midline were implanted in Medicine-Sub-intensive Unit (36/139 vs 12/238 p < 0.000) where also a higher number of Centrally Inserted Central Catheter and Femoral Inserted Central Catheter were implanted (8/139 vs 1/238 p = 0.003). This change allowed us to implant more vascular accesses in Medicine-Sub-intensive Unit favoring Midline with a longer average duration. Only one patient with Midline developed a catheter vein thrombosis, and in only one patient the device was removed for suspected infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The experience we gained will allow us to be more prepared in the future and our experience has highlighted that a structured Vascular Access Team is necessary to respond adequately to COVID-19 patients' needs, to ensure the effectiveness of the maneuver, to reduce complications and to avoid the waste of resources, always working in safe condition.