经外周中心静脉置管和传统深静脉置管的并发症风险对比

目的分析神经重症监护病房(NICU)患者接受经外周中心静脉置管(PICC)和传统中心静脉置管(CVC)导管相关并发症发生率的差异,以更好的指导临床应用。方法选择2009年1月1日～2017年12月31日于航天中心医院NICU和首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院NICU住院患者317例,根据患者置管方式不同分为PICC组134例和CVC组183例,回顾性比较分析2组患者在导管相关性症状性血栓形成(SCRDVT)、导管相关性血行感染(CRBSI)及严重置管操作损伤等并发症的发生风险差异。结果PICC组平均留置时间显著长于CVC组[(19.8±10.4)d vs (14.9±9.0)d,P=0.001];SCRDVT发生率显著高于CVC组(7.5%vs 1.6%,P=0.010)。PICC组与CVC组CRBSI发生率无显著差异(6.0%vs 6.0%,P=0.988);PICC组无严重置管操作损伤发生,CVC组2例,其中气胸1例,误置入锁骨下动脉1例。结论 NICU患者中,PICC较传统CVC有更高的SCRDVT发生风险,但结论仍需多中心、大样本的研究证实。     

Risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection with peripherally inserted central venous catheters used in hospitalized patients

BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) are now widely used for intermediate and long-term access in current-day health care, especially in the inpatient setting, where they are increasingly supplanting conventional central venous catheters (CVCs) placed percutaneously into the internal jugular, subclavian, or femoral veins. Data on the risk of PICC-related bloodstream infection (BSI) with PICCs used in hospitalized patients are limited. STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk of PICC-related BSI in hospitalized patients. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using data from two randomized trials assessing the efficacy of chlorhexidine-impregnated sponge dressing and chlorhexidine for cutaneous antisepsis. METHODS: PICCs inserted into the antecubital vein in two randomized trials during from 1998 to 2000 were prospectively studied; most patients were in an ICU. PICC-related BSI was confirmed in each case by demonstrating concordance between isolates colonizing the PICC at the time of removal and from blood cultures by restriction-fragment DNA subtyping. RESULTS: Overall, 115 patients had 251 PICCs placed. Mean duration of catheterization was 11.3 days (total, 2,832 PICC-days); 42% of the patients were in an ICU at some time, 62% had urinary catheters, and 49% had received mechanical ventilation. Six PICC-related BSIs were identified (2.4%), four with coagulase-negative staphylococcus, one with Staphylococcus aureus, and one with Klebsiella pneumoniae, a rate of 2.1 per 1,000 catheter-days. CONCLUSION: This prospective study shows that PICCs used in high-risk hospitalized patients are associated with a rate of catheter-related BSI similar to conventional CVCs placed in the internal jugular or subclavian veins (2 to 5 per 1,000 catheter-days), much higher than with PICCs used exclusively in the outpatient setting (approximately 0.4 per 1,000 catheter-days), and higher than with cuffed and tunneled Hickman-like CVCs (approximately 1 per 1,000 catheter-days). A randomized trial of PICCs and conventional CVCs in hospitalized patients requiring central access is needed. Our data raise the question of whether the growing trend in many hospital hematology and oncology services to switch from use of cuffed and tunneled CVCs to PICCs is justified, particularly since PICCs are more vulnerable to thrombosis and dislodgment, and are less useful for drawing blood specimens. Moreover, PICCs are not advisable in patients with renal failure and impending need for dialysis, in whom preservation of upper-extremity veins is needed for fistula or graft implantation.     

High rate of complications associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters in patients with solid tumours

BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) have been used extensively as a cost-effective and safe form of medium-term intravascular access. There are only limited data about complications of PICC lines in oncology patients despite theoretical concerns about the higher risks of complications in these patients as a result of cancer itself and cancer therapy. AIMS: To document the frequency and type of PICC complications in patients with solid tumours. METHODS: All patients with solid tumours who were treated at Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia between January 2000 and March 2001 were included in a retrospective review of PICC complications. RESULTS: Twenty-seven PICC lines were inserted in 17 patients; 40.7% (11/27) of PICC lines developed complications requiring early removal of the PICC. Complications encountered were sepsis (systemic and cellulitis), thrombosis, blockage and leakage. Septic complications were found at a rate of 8/1000 PICC days or 25.7% (7/27) of PICC inserted. The median dwell time was 20 days. The mean time for a complication to occur was 27.5 days. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates a high rate of complications, which is higher than the complication rates reported in studies of non-oncology patients. PICC lines should be used with caution in patients with solid tumours. Prospective studies of the factors influencing the incidence of complications might be warranted.     

Intravenous electrocardiographic guidance for placement of peripherally inserted central catheters

Background

Correct positioning of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) is essential to avoid complications. We evaluated intravenous electrocardiogram (ECG) recordings during PICC placement to assess the effectiveness of this guidance technique to reduce complications resulting from incorrect catheter placement.

Methods

Six patients undergoing PowerPICC catheter insertion were included in this pilot study. Venography through the PICC was performed to identify the superior vena cava-right atrial (SVC-RA) junction. Unipolar ECG recordings from the catheter stylet measured P-wave changes during PICC insertion.

Results

The peak P-wave amplitude was highest at the SVC-RA junction. With catheter insertion into the RA, P-wave amplitude decreased and eventually became negative. With catheter withdrawal into the SVC, P-wave amplitude decreased.

Conclusions

P-wave amplitude was highest when the PICC catheter was in the optimal location at the SVC-RA junction. Intravenous ECG monitoring during PICC insertion seems to be a promising technique to guide catheter positioning.     

Survey of the use of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in neonates with critical congenital cardiac disease

Neonates with congenital cardiac disease are a special population. They are often critically ill, and need prolonged intravenous access. To date, no study has evaluated the efficacy and safety of peripherally inserted central venous catheters placed in this unique population. Our goal was to evaluate the use of such catheters in neonates with critical congenital cardiac disease, and to study features such as duration of use, reasons for removal of catheters, and complications. We inserted a total of 124 catheters in 115 neonates with critical congenital cardiac disease who were admitted to the Intensive Care Unit at Texas Children's Hospital from August 2002 to August 2004. The patients had a mean age of 10 days, and a mean weight of 3.1 kilograms. The peripherally inserted catheters were in place for a mean of 22.3 days. Therapy was completed in 76.6% patients at the time of removal of the catheter. The incidence of occlusion, dislodgement, and thrombus was 4.0%, 2.4%, and 1.6%, respectively. The infection rate was 3.6 per 1000 catheter-days, with a median onset on 37 days after placement. We conclude that central venous catheters, when inserted peripherally, provide reliable and safe access for prolonged intravenous therapy in neonates with critical congenital cardiac disease.     

Bloodstream infection, venous thrombosis, and peripherally inserted central catheters: reappraising the evidence

The widespread use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has transformed the care of medical and surgical patients. Whereas intravenous antibiotics, parenteral nutrition, and administration of chemotherapy once necessitated prolonged hospitalization, PICCs have eliminated the need for such practice. However, PICCs may not be as innocuous as once thought; a growing body of evidence suggests that these devices also have important risks. This review discusses the origin of PICCs and highlights reasons behind their rapid adoption in medical practice. We evaluate the evidence behind 2 important PICC-related complications-venous thrombosis and bloodstream infections-and describe how initial studies may have led to a false sense of security with respect to these outcomes. In this context, we introduce a conceptual model to understand the risk of PICC-related complications and guide the use of these devices. Through this model, we outline recommendations that clinicians may use to prevent PICC-related adverse events. We conclude by highlighting important knowledge gaps and identifying avenues for future research in this area.     

肝病患者经外周置入中心静脉导管的安全护理

目的通过控制各环节质量,确保经外周静脉留置中心静脉导管（peripherally inserted central catheters,PmC）术在肝病患者中的安全护理。方法对533例接受PICC置管治疗的慢性病毒性肝炎患者进行安全护理。结果HCC置管过程中的出血量控制在0-8ml,术后渗血率为10．13％,静脉炎的发生率为9．38％,感染率为0．75％,满意率为98．87％,无断管等严重并发症发生。结论提高PICC置管人员资质,采用规范的导管使用和护理措施是确保PICC在肝病患者中安全护理的关键。     

Placement of peripherally inserted central catheters in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

This report describes our experiences with three patients requiring several weeks of central venous access for various intravenous therapies. These particular patients posed a considerable challenge for bedside placement of a peripherally inserted central catheter, so the catheters were placed in the cardiac catheterization laboratory by the cardiology team involved using a different technique for each patient. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn. 41:189–191, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Peripherally inserted central venous catheters for treatment of cystic fibrosis

Patients who have cystic fibrosis (CF) are frequently hospitalized for long-term intravenous (IV) treatment. We evaluated clinical effectiveness of the Drum-Cartridge Catheter (Abbott Laboratories) for such patients. The catheter is placed peripherally under local anesthesia via an antecubital vein into the superior vena cava or right atrium. Patients who were more than 10 years of age and who were hospitalized for IV antibiotic therapy and/or IV hyperalimentation were studied. All but 2 patients had CF. Using an aseptic technique the catheters were inserted into the basilic or cephalic vein. Chest radiographs were used to confirm the final location of the catheter. Catheters were used to administer IV antibiotics, hyperalimentation, and lipids. There were 38 catheterizations in 23 patients; several patients had repeated insertions at later admissions. The success rate of insertion was 86% with 31 of the 38 insertions initially located either in the superior vena cava or right atrium. Mean duration of catheterization was 15.4 days (range 5-49 days). No major complications such as sepsis, catheter or clot embolism, pneumothorax, vascular perforation, or hemorrhage occurred in the patients who had DF. Complications that required displacement of catheter into the axillary vein (1 patient), and cracked catheter hub (1 patient). This study shows that the Drum-Cartridge Catheter can be used easily for IV therapy of patients who have CF for a long duration, repeatedly, and with no major complications.     

An unknown complication of peripherally inserted central venous catheter in a patient with ventricular assist device

We report an unknown complication of peripherally inserted central venous catheter in a patient with Ventricular Assist Device. This rare complication led to the failure of the right ventricular assist device, which could be detrimental in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy.     

Thromboembolic complications related to central venous access catheters in cancer patients

Recent well-designed, prospective, controlled trials have demonstrated a lower incidence of catheter-related deep vein thrombosis (CRDVT) compared with earlier studies but this complication remains an important limitation to the delivery of drugs and supportive care to cancer patients. Prophylaxis of CRDVT with antithrombotic agents was not supported by recent prospective randomized trials, and its routine use is not recommended. Larger studies will be required to determine if cancer patients at particularly high risk for CRDVT can benefit from prophylaxis with antithrombotic agents. There are no prospective controlled studies to guide the therapy of CRDVT but treatment with anticoagulants remains the mainstay of therapy. Although recently published guidelines might help standardize the therapy of patients with CRDVT, prospective controlled studies are needed to determine the optimal therapy of this important complication of central venous catheters in cancer patients.     

Venous thromboembolism associated with long-term use of central venous catheters in cancer patients

OBJECTIVES: Increased incidence of cancers and the development of totally implanted venous access devices that contain their own port to deliver chemotherapy will lead to a greater than before numbers of central venous catheter related thrombosis (CVCT). Medical consequences include catheter dysfunction and pulmonary embolism. Compared with lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (3 d) and with non CVC associated thrombosis (5 d), CVCT is associated with an increased duration of hospitalisation (9 d). CVCT oftentimes leads to the need to replace such ports at an average cost of 4500 euros. CURRENT KNOWLEDGE AND KEY POINTS: Vessel injury caused by the procedure of CVC insertion is the most important risk factor for development of CVCT. This event could cause the formation of a fresh thrombus, which is reversible in the large majority of patients. The incidence of CVC-related DVT assessed by venography has been reported to vary from 30 to 60% but catheter-related DVT in adult patients is symptomatic in only 5% of cases. The majority of patients with CVC-related DVT is asymptomatic or has non-specific symptoms: arm or neck swelling or pain, distal paresthesias, headache, congestion of subcutaneous collateral veins. In the case of clinical suspicion of CVC-related DVT, compressive ultrasonography (US), especially with Doppler and color imaging, currently is first used to confirm the diagnosis. The main criteria of color-Doppler US are visualization of mural thrombi or incompressibility of the veins. Consequently, contrast venography is reserved for clinical trials and difficult diagnostic situations. There is no consensus on the optimal management of patients with CVC-related DVT. Treatment of CVC-related VTE requires a 5- to 7-day course of adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin or LMWH followed by oral anticoagulants. Long-term LMWH that has been shown to be more effective than oral anticoagulant in cancer patients with lower limb DVT could be used in these patients. The optimal duration of oral anticoagulation treatment for CVC-related DVT is unknown, but patients with active cancer should be treated for at least 6 months or indefinitely. FUTURE PROSPECTS AND PROJECTS: The efficacy and safety of pharmacologic prophylaxis for CVC related thrombosis is not established. Additional studies performed in high risk populations are needed to define if LMWH or oral anticoagulation is indicated in this clinical setting.     

经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管临床应用新进展

经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管（PICC）是由外周静脉（贵要静脉、肘正中静脉、头静脉）穿刺插管,其尖端定位于上腔静脉的导管,临床上广泛用于需长期静脉输液、化疗、胃肠外营养（PN）、使用刺激外周静脉的药物、缺乏外周静脉通路、家庭病床、早产儿、中心静脉压测量等患者。