Femoral venous access: State of the art and future perspectives

Epidemiology and Clinical Insights of Catheter-Related Candidemia in Non-ICU Patients with Vascular Access Devices

INTRODUCTION

Vascular access devices (VADs), namely peripheral VADs (PVADs) and central venous VADs (CVADs), are crucial in both intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU settings. However, VAD placement carries risks, notably catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs). Candida spp. is a common pathogen in CRBSIs, yet its clinical and microbiological characteristics, especially in non-ICU settings, are underexplored.

METHODS

We conducted a monocentric, retrospective observational study at Luigi Sacco Hospital from 1 May 2021 to 1 September 2023. We reviewed medical records of non-ICU adult patients with CVADs and PVADs. Data on demographics, clinical and laboratory results, VAD placement, and CRBSI occurrences were collected. Statistical analysis compared Candida spp. CRBSI and bacterial CRBSI groups.

RESULTS

Out of 1802 VAD placements in 1518 patients, 54 cases of CRBSI were identified, and Candida spp. was isolated in 30.9% of episodes. The prevalence of CRBSI was 3.05%, with Candida spp. accounting for 0.94%. Incidence rates were 2.35 per 1000 catheter days for CRBSI, with Candida albicans and Candida non-albicans at 0.47 and 0.26 per 1000 catheter days, respectively-patients with Candida spp. CRBSI had more frequent SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 pneumonia, and hypoalbuminemia.

CONCLUSIONS

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Candida spp. was a notable cause of CRBSIs in our center, underscoring the importance of considering Candida spp. in suspected CRBSI cases, including those in non-ICU settings and in those with PVADs.

A GAVeCeLT consensus on the indication, insertion, and management of central venous access devices in the critically ill

Central venous access devices are essential for the management of critically ill patients, but they are potentially associated with many complications, which may occur during or after insertion. Many evidence-based documents-consensus and guidelines-suggest practical recommendations for reducing catheter-related complications, but they have some limitations. Some documents are not focused on critically ill patients; other documents address only some special strategies, such as the use of ultrasound; other documents are biased by obsolete concepts, inappropriate terminology, and lack of considerations for new technologies and new methods. Thus, the Italian Group of Venous Access Devices (GAVeCeLT) has decided to offer an updated compendium of the main strategies-old and new-that should be adopted for minimizing catheter-related complications in the adult critically ill patient. The project has been planned as a consensus, rather than a guideline, since many issues in this field are relatively recent, and few high-quality randomized clinical studies are currently available, particularly in the area of indications and choice of the device. Panelists were chosen between the Italian vascular access experts who had published papers on peer-reviewed journals about this topic in the last few years. The consensus process was carried out according to the RAND/University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methodology, a modification of the Delphi method, that is, a structured process for collecting knowledge from groups of experts through a series of questionnaires. The final document has been structured as statements which answer to four major sets of questions regarding central venous access in the critically ill: (1) before insertion (seven questions), (2) during insertion (eight questions), (3) after insertion (three questions), and (4) at removal (three questions).

Totally implanted central venous access devices inserted by the femoral route: A narrative review and the proposal of a novel approach, the FICC-port

BACKGROUND

Femoral ports are used in patients with indication to a totally implanted venous access device but with contraindication to chest-ports and brachial ports because of obstruction of the superior vena cava. In the last three decades, femoral ports have been implanted almost exclusively by cannulation of the common femoral vein at the groin, while the position of the tip has been assessed by X-ray.

METHODS

We report our experience with a new approach to femoral ports, which includes recent methods and techniques developed in the last few years. These novel femoral ports, which we call "FICC-ports," are characterized by (a) long femoral 5 Fr polyurethane catheter inserted by ultrasound-guided puncture of the superficial femoral vein at mid-thigh; (b) intraprocedural location of the tip in the sub-diaphragmatic inferior vena cava, using ultrasound visualization by the transhepatic and/or the subcostal view; (c) low-profile or very low-profile reservoir implanted above the quadriceps muscle, at mid-thigh.

RESULTS

In the last 3 years, we have implanted 47 FICC-ports in young adults with mediastinal lymphoma compressing the superior vena cava. We had no immediate/early complication, and only three late complications (one kinking of the catheter in the subcutaneous tissue; one tip migration with secondary venous thrombosis; one persistent withdrawal occlusion due to fibroblastic sleeve).

CONCLUSION

If there is indication to a femoral port, the implantation of a "FICC-port"-as described above-is to be strongly considered in terms of safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness: no immediate-early complications, minimal late complications, no X-ray exposure, low invasiveness, low cost.