High risk of deep vein thrombosis associated with peripherally inserted central catheters in lymphoma

Complication Rates of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Oncologic Versus Non-Oncologic Patients

OBJECTIVES

Peripherally inserted central catheters are commonly used in cancer patients and provide vascular access for the administration of chemotherapy, antibiotics, or parenteral nutrition. Besides many advantages, they represent a source of possible complications such as catheter related blood stream infection, catheter occlusion, or thrombosis. In this study, the catheter-related complication rate between oncologic and non-oncologic patients was compared.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort-study included 411 patients who underwent their first catheter placement at the Vienna General Hospital-Medical University of Vienna from January 2013 to June 2018. Patient demographics and catheter-related parameters were collected and statistically analyzed using a competing risk model.

RESULTS

Mean catheter dwell time was 27.75 days. The overall complication rate was 7.54% (2.72 per 1000 catheter days). Underlying malignant disease (hazard ratio: 0.351, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.133-0.929, P = .035) and chemotherapy administration (hazard ratio: 2.837, 95% CI: 1.088-7.394, P = .033) were significantly associated with the occurrence of any kind of complication. Catheter related blood stream infection was observed among 11 (2.68%) patients and again significantly associated with chemotherapy administration (hazard ratio: 4.545, 95% CI: 1.178-17.539; P = .028). Thrombosis was found in 7 (1.70%) patients and occlusion in 13 (3.16%) cases.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Choice of venous access is an interdisciplinary decision with emphasis on patient participation. In oncologic patients, our data suggests that the benefits of peripherally inserted central catheters regarding costs, invasiveness, and accessibility might be outweighed by the higher rate of complications associated with the device. This becomes even more important in a community care setting, where standardized handling procedures and patient education play a pivotal role in device safety.

Prevalence of PICC-related thrombosis in patients with hematological malignancies: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To estimate the prevalence of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-related venous thrombosis in patients with hematological malignancies.

METHODS

A systematic review of observational studies that evaluated the occurrence of PICC-related venous thrombosis in children, adults, and older people with hematological malignancies was conducted. Searches were carried out on June 12th, 2023 on PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and LILACS, and to gray literature on Google Scholar, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Eligibility criteria were applied independently by two reviewers, first on the titles and abstracts on the Rayyan platform and then on the full text of eligible studies. Risk of bias was assessed by the JBI checklist. Data were summarized descriptively, and the meta-analysis was carried out using the MetaXL 5.3 software. The review followed JBI guidelines and PRISMA for reporting.

RESULTS

In the 40 studies included, prevalence of PICC-related venous thrombosis was 9% in general, 9% in adults, and 6% in children with hematological malignancies. Most studies only evaluated cases of symptomatic thrombosis (n = 25; 64%).

CONCLUSION

Patients with hematological malignancies using PICC have an estimated prevalence of PICC-related venous thrombosis of 9%, and this rate may be underestimated due to the consideration of mostly symptomatic cases.

Platelet Parameters as Biomarkers for Thrombosis Risk in Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a major cause of both morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. Platelet count has been investigated as a predictor of CAT in various settings while knowledge on platelet activation parameters is sparse. This report provides a systematic review and meta-analysis on available literature on associations between platelet count and/or function and arterial and venous thrombosis in adult cancer patients. The review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. PubMed and Embase were searched up to March 2022. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's tools were used for quality assessment. In total, 100 studies were included which investigated the association between CAT and platelet count (n = 90), platelet indices (n = 19), and platelet function/activation markers (n = 13) in patients with solid cancers (n = 61), hematological cancers (n = 17), or mixed cancer types (n = 22). Eighty-one studies had venous thrombosis as their outcome measure, while 4 had arterial thrombosis and 15 studies had both. We found significantly elevated odds ratio of 1.50 (95% confidence interval: 1.19-1.88) for thrombosis with higher platelet counts. We saw a tendency toward an association between markers of platelet activation in forms of mean platelet volume and soluble P selectin and both arterial and venous thrombosis. Only one study investigated dynamic platelet function using flow cytometry. In conclusion, platelet count is associated with CAT across different cancer types and settings. Platelet function or activation marker analysis may be valuable in assisting thrombosis risk assessment in cancer patients but is sparsely investigated so far.

Preventive effect of aspirin on peripherally inserted central catheter-related vein thrombosis in patients with malignant tumors

The majority of patients receiving chemotherapy undergo PICC catheterization. However, PICCs are significantly associated with catheter related complications, including deep vein thrombosis, blood infection, fibrin sheath, catheter prolapse, catheter displacement and blockage. Of all the risks, PICC-related VT was the most prevailing clinic symptom and resulted in a high risk of death.

AIM

The study aimed to investigate the preventive efficacy and safety of aspirin for patients with malignant tumors receiving venous thrombosis (VT) related with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted. Participants with malignant tumors receiving chemotherapy who accepted PICC insertion operation were randomly allocated to the aspirin treatment group (n = 235) or the control group (n = 246). The patients in the aspirin group were administrated aspirin (100mg) for 30 days, whereas the patients in control group were administrated a placebo drug. The incidence of PICC-related VT in both groups and the aspirin related adverse effects were evaluated.

RESULTS

The incidence of PICC-related VT was 0.4% in the aspirin group, compared with 3.3% in the control group (P = 0.038). In addition, aspirin related bleeding was not observed.

CONCLUSION

PICC-related VT could be effectively prevented by aspirin in patients with malignant tumors.

Biomarkers Associated with Thrombosis in Patients with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The measurement and identification of plasma biomarkers can support the estimation of risk and diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) associated with the use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC).

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the association between the levels of potential biomarkers that reflect the activation of the blood system, long-term vascular complications, inflammatory system, and the occurrence of PICC-related DVT.

METHODS

Seven electronic databases (Embase, Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cinahl, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ERIC) were searched to identify literature published until December 2022. Studies were required to report: (I) adult and pediatric patients, outpatient or admitted to clinical, surgical, or ICU with PICC; (II) patients with PICC-related DVT and patients without PICC-related DVT as a comparator; and (III) at least one biomarker available. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. Study precision was evaluated by using a funnel plot for platelets level. We provided a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis of the findings on the biomarkers' outcomes of the studies. We pooled the results using random effects meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software v5.4. This systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018108871).

RESULTS

Of the 3564 studies identified (after duplication removal), 28 were included. PICC-related DVT was associated with higher D-dimers (0.37 μg/mL, 95% CI 0.02, 0.72; p = 0.04, I² = 92%; p for heterogeneity < 0.00001) and with higher platelets (8.76 × 10⁹/L, 95% CI 1.62, 15.91; p = 0.02, I² = 41%; p for heterogeneity = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

High levels of D-dimer and platelet were associated with DVT in patients with PICC. However, biomarkers such as APTT, fibrinogen, FDP, glucose, hemoglobin, glycated hemoglobin, INR, prothrombin time, prothrombin fragment 1.2, the thrombin-antithrombin complex, and WBC were not related to the development of DVT associated with PICC.

Clinical factors of PICC-RVT in cancer patients: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

There is a lack of studies that systematically evaluate the clinical factors of PICC-RVT such as treatment, tumor stage, metastasis, and chemotherapy drugs in cancer patients. This study, therefore, aims to evaluate the clinical factors of catheter-related venous thrombosis in cancer patients with indwelling PICC to provide a basis for the clinical prevention and reduction of thrombosis.

METHODS

Relevant studies were retrieved from major databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data, and China Biology Medicine disc (CMB)) and searched from their earliest available dates until July 2022. If two or more studies had the same outcome, a meta-analysis using RevMan 5.4.1 was performed. This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (number CRD42022358426).

RESULTS

A total of 19 articles involving 19,824 patients were included for quantitative analysis. Meta-analysis of these studies indicated that a history of chemotherapy, tumor type, tumor stage, presence or absence of metastasis, and use of fluorouracil, etoposide, platinum drugs, and taxane were all risk factors for PICC catheter thrombosis in cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

In clinical PICC catheter thrombosis prevention, patients with the above characteristics should be watched more closely than other patients, as they have a higher risk for PICC catheter thrombosis. Based on the present evidence at hand, radiotherapy cannot be considered to be related to the formation of PICC-RVT in cancer patients.

The incidence and risk of venous thromboembolism associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters in hospitalized patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) can be fatal if not treated promptly, and individual studies have reported wide variability in rates of VTE associated with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC). We thus conducted this meta-analysis to investigate the overall incidence and risk of developing PICC-related VTE in hospitalized patients.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from inception until January 26, 2022. In studies with a non-comparison arm, the pooled incidence of PICC-related VTE was calculated. The pooled odds ratio (OR) was calculated to assess the risk of VTE in the studies that compared PICC to the central venous catheter (CVC). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess methodological quality.

Results

A total of 75 articles (58 without a comparison arm and 17 with), including 109292 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled incidence of symptomatic VTE was 3.7% (95% CI: 3.1–4.4) in non-comparative studies. In the subgroup meta-analysis, the incidence of VTE was highest in patients who were in a critical care setting (10.6%; 95% CI: 5.0–17.7). Meta-analysis of comparative studies revealed that PICC was associated with a statistically significant increase in the odds of VTE events compared with CVC (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.83–3.37; P < 0.01). However, in subgroup analysis stratified by the study design, there was no significant difference in VTE events between the PICC and CVC in randomized controlled trials (OR, 2.28; 95% CI, 0.77–6.74; P = 0.13).

Conclusion

Best practice standards such as PICC tip verification and VTE prophylaxis can help reduce the incidence and risk of PICC-related VTE. The risk-benefit of inserting PICC should be carefully weighed, especially in critically ill patients. Cautious interpretation of our results is important owing to substantial heterogeneity among the studies included in this study.

Retrospective analysis of the safety of peripherally inserted catheters versus implanted port catheters during first-line treatment for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Objectives

Both peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and implanted port catheters (PORTs) are commonly used for the delivery of immunochemotherapy. We compared the safety of the two types of devices in a homogeneous and monocentric population of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients who were treated with first‐line immunochemotherapy by evaluating the numbers of catheter‐related venous thromboses (VTs) and infections that occurred in the six months after implantation according to the type of device.

Methods

Using a propensity score, the adjusted relative risk (ARR) between the type of catheter and the occurrence of catheter‐related complications (infection and/or VT) of interest was retrospectively determined.

Results

479 patients were enrolled (266 PORTs/213 PICCs), and 26 VTs (5.4%) and 30 infections (6.3%) were identified in the period following PICC/PORT implantation. The adjusted relative risk (ARR) of catheter‐related complications (infection and/or VT) according to the type of device was 2.6 (95% CI =1.3–5.9, p = .0075). This risk increase associated with the PICC device was significant for both infections (ARR = 3.2; 95% CI = 1.3–10.9) and thrombosis (ARR = 4; 95% CI = 1.5–11.6).

Conclusion

Our study supports the preferential use of PORTs for the first line of treatment for DLBCL patients.

Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: Current Knowledge and Future Directions

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) has been increasing in incidence due to the escalating use of central venous catheters such as peripherally inserted central catheters. UEDVT can be primary idiopathic or secondary to pacemaker leads, intravascular catheters or cancer. In comparison to conventional venous thromboembolism such as lower limb deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism the risk factors, investigations, and management are not well defined. We review current evidence in primary and secondary UEDVT, highlighting areas in need of further research. We also explore the entity of venous thoracic outlet syndrome, which is said to be a risk factor for recurrent primary UEDVT and is the rationale behind surgical interventions.

Risk Factors of PICC-Related Venous Thrombosis in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy

Background

To analyze the risk factors of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-related venous thrombosis in patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy and explore its preventive measures.

Methods

Data of 780 patients with breast cancer who underwent PICC chemotherapy in our hospital from January 2014 to June 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. The incidence of catheter-related thrombosis was observed, and related factors of venous thrombosis were analyzed.

Results

Among the 780 patients with breast cancer, 36 developed PICC-related venous thrombosis. The incidence of which was 4.62% (36/780). The PICC retention time ranged between 60 and 136 days, and the median time was 92 days. Thrombosis was found to occur within seven days after catheterization in three patients (8.33%), between 7 and 30 days in 18 patients (50%), between 31 and 92 days in 12 patients (33.3%), and ≥92 days in three patients (8.33%). Basilic vein puncture-induced thrombosis occurred in 25 patients (3.68%), and median cubital vein and cephalic vein puncture-induced thrombosis occurred in 11 patients (10.78%). The difference was statistically significant (P = 0.001). Thrombosis was not associated with age, punctured limb, platelet count, or chemotherapy drugs (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Blood vessel puncture was the main factor that affected PICC-related thrombosis in breast cancer chemotherapy. The basilic vein should be the primary choice for blood vessel puncture. Prolonged catheter retention does not increase the risk of thrombosis.

Venous Thromboembolism in Lymphoma: Risk Stratification and Antithrombotic Prophylaxis

Lymphoma is listed among the neoplasias with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Risk factors for VTE appear to differ from risk factors in solid tumors. We review the literature of the last 20 years for reports identifying these risk factors in cohorts consisting exclusively of lymphoma patients. We selected 25 publications. The most frequent studies were analyses of retrospective single-center cohorts. We also included two reports of pooled analyses of clinical trials, two meta-analyses, two analyses of patient registries, and three analyses of population-based databases. The VTE risk is the highest upfront during the first two months after lymphoma diagnosis and decreases over time. This upfront risk may be related to tumor burden and the start of chemotherapy as contributing factors. Factors consistently reported as VTE risk factors are aggressive histology, a performance status ECOG ≥ 2 leading to increased immobility, more extensive disease, and localization to particular sites, such as central nervous system (CNS) and mediastinal mass. Association between laboratory values that are part of risk assessment models in solid tumors and VTE risk in lymphomas are very inconsistent. Recently, VTE risk scores for lymphoma were developed that need further validation, before they can be used for risk stratification and primary prophylaxis. Knowledge of VTE risk factors in lymphomas may help in the evaluation of the individual risk-benefit ratio of prophylaxis and help to design prospective studies on primary prophylaxis in lymphoma.

Venous thromboembolic events in lymphoma patients: Actual relationships between epidemiology, mechanisms, clinical profile and treatment

Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) are an underestimated health problem in patients with lymphoma. Many factors contribute to the pathogenesis of thromboembolism and the interplay between various mechanisms that provoke VTE is still poorly understood. The identification of parameters that are associated with an increased risk of VTE in lymphoma patients led to the creation of several risk-assessment models. The models that evaluate potential VTE risk in lymphoma patients in particular are quite limited, and have to be validated in larger study populations. Furthermore, the VTE prophylaxis in lymphoma patients is largely underused, despite the incidence of VTE. The lack of adequate guidelines for the prophylaxis and treatment of VTE in lymphoma patients, together with a cautious approach due to an increased risk of bleeding, demands great efforts to ensure the implementation of current knowledge in order to reduce the incidence and complications of VTE in lymphoma patients.