A Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter is a Safe and Reliable Alternative to Short-Term Central Venous Catheter for the Treatment of Trauma Patients

Anatomical Structures to Be Concerned With During Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Procedures

BACKGROUND

The central line has been frequently used for drug and nutrition supply and regular blood sampling of patients with chronic diseases. However, this procedure is performed in a highly sensitive area and has several potential complications. Therefore, peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC), which have various advantages, are being extensively used. Although the number of PICC procedures is increasing, the anatomy for safe procedures has not yet been properly established. Therefore, we studied basic anatomical information for safe procedures.

METHODS

We used 20 fixed cadavers (40 arms) donated to the Korea University College of Medicine. The mean age was 76.75 years (range, 48-94 years). After dissection of each arm, the distribution pattern of the basilic vein and close structures was recorded, and some important parameters based on bony landmarks were measured. In addition, the number of vein branches (axillary region) and basilic vein diameter were also checked.

RESULTS

The mean length from the insertion site to the right atrium was 38.39 ± 2.63 cm (left) and 34.66 ± 3.60 cm (right), and the basilic vein diameter was 4.93 ± 1.18 mm (left) and 4.08 ± 1.49 mm (right). The data showed significant differences between the left and right arms (P < 0.05). The mean distance from the basilic vein to brachial artery was 8.29 ± 2.78 mm in men and 7.81 ± 2.78 mm in women, while the distance to the ulnar nerve was 5.41 ± 1.67 mm in men and 5.52 ± 2.06 mm in women.

CONCLUSION

According to these results, the right arm has a shorter distance from the insertion site to the right atrium, and the left arm has a wider vein diameter, which is advantageous for the procedure. In addition, the ulnar nerve and brachial artery were located close to or behind the insertion site. Therefore, special attention is required during the procedure to avoid damaging these important structures.

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.

Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter lines for Intensive Care Unit and onco-hematologic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) lines are associated with lower complication rates as compared to conventional Central Venous Catheters (CVCs), especially in high risk patients.

OBJECTIVE

To compare Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (CLABSI) and catheter-related thrombosis rates in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and onco-hematologic patients with PICC lines and CVCs.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases to identify relevant studies. Study quality was evaluated using appropriate assessment tools and the pooled odds ratio (OR) and confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Sensitivity analyses were performed based on meta-analysis method, type of study and prophylaxis implementation.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in our meta-analysis. PICC lines were associated with a significantly higher rate of thrombosis in ICU [OR (95%CI): 2.58(1.80,3.70); P_z<0.00001] and onco-hematologic [OR (95%CI): 2.91(2.11,4.02); P_z<0.00001] patients. CLABSI rates with PICC lines were not significantly different in ICU patients [OR (95%CI): 1.65(0.91,2.99); P_z= 0.1], but significantly lower CLABSI rates were observed in onco-hematologic patients [OR (95%CI): 0.38(0.16,0.91); P_z=0.03]. Sensitivity analyses verified the robustness of our results.

CONCLUSIONS

PICC lines are associated with higher rates of thrombotic events. However, they might be suitable for onco-hematologic patients due to lower CLABSI rates.