区域PICC维护网络的构建及其在出院带管患者并发症预防中的价值

目的:探讨区域外周静脉穿刺中心静脉置管（PICC）维护网的建立及其在出院带管患者并发症预防中的价值。方法:以区域中心医院为主线建立区域PICC维护网,提供规范、便捷的PICC导管维护服务,严格PICC网络质量控制,对比网络建立前后带管并发症或不良事件发生率、就近维护患者比例等。结果:本区域PICC维护网共纳入各级医疗机构13个,研究期内,接受患者电话咨询175个,通过微信和QQ平台解决PICC置管维护疑难问题52例次。观察组五项并发症发生率均较对照组下降,带管并发症总发生率（3.26%）较对照组显著下降（P<0.001）,观察组就近维护患者占比（95.12%）显著高于对照组（P<0.001）,提前拔管患者明显减少（P<0.001）,观察组患者对PICC维护服务总体满意度（95.58%）明显高于对照组（P=0.000）。结论:区域PICC维护网为患者提供规范、高效的导管维护服务,减少了PICC置管并发症的发生,保障了患者安全。     

PICC患者自我管理研究现状

经外周置入中心静脉导管（peripherally inserted central catheter,PICC）已在化疗患者中广泛应用,尤其适用于化疗间歇期带管回家的患者。PICC留置期间患者自我管理质量直接影响导管安全。本文就PICC患者自我管理的研究现状进行综述,简要介绍CDSMP（慢性病自我管理项目）在PICC患者自我管理中的应用,以利于今后的研究。     

PICC患者自我管理研究现状

经外周置入中心静脉导管(peripherally inserted central catheter,PICC)已在化疗患者中广泛应用,尤其适用于化疗间歇期带管回家的患者。PICC留置期间患者自我管理质量直接影响导管安全。本文就PICC患者自我管理的研究现状进行综述,简要介绍CDSMP(慢性病自我管理项目)在PICC患者自我管理中的应用,以利于今后的研究。     

PICC 与颈内静脉插管在肿瘤患者化疗中的应用比较

 目的 比较经外周静脉穿刺中心静脉插管（PICC）和颈内静脉插管在肿瘤患者化疗中的优缺点。方法 观察34例PICC插管和30例颈内静脉插管的插管成功率、穿刺时间、导管留置时间、液体流速和穿刺并发症。结果 与颈内静脉插管相比较，发现PICC插管的一次成功率较高，为88．2％（P〈0．05），穿刺时间较短，平均操作时间为13．38±5分钟（P〈0．01），导管留置时间明显延长，平均128天（P〈0．01）。PICC导管的主要并发症为导管堵塞、周围静脉炎和导管相关感染，颈内静脉导管的主要并发症为导管相关感染和误入动脉。结论 PICC和颈内静脉插管均存在各自的优缺点。与颈内静脉插管相比，PICC是一种较为安全、易于掌握的插管方法，对于长期化疗或静脉输液的病人，应首选PICC插管。     

肺癌患者家属共同参与式结对护理方案对PICC置管导管维护和不良事件的作用

【摘要】 目的 分析对行PICC置管肺癌患者实施家属共同参与式结对护理方案,对其导管维护和不良事件的影响,为肺癌患者常规性治疗措施提供配套照护。方法 将2017年5月至2018年4月南京医科大学第一附属医院接诊的46例行PICC置管肺癌患者实施常规性临床照护,设为对照组;将2018年5月至2019年4月接诊的48例行PICC置管肺癌患者,在常规照护基础上引入家属共同参与式结对护理方案,设为研究组。比较两组患者PICC置管期间相关导管不良事件发生率,相关全身不良事件发生率,PICC置管留置时长、敷贴更换次数、照护人员与患者之间的交流次数及患者对自身所享受到的照护服务满意度。结果 研究组患者在随访期间相关导管不良事件发生率低于对照组,全身不良事件的发生率低于对照组, PICC置管留置时间长于对照组,敷贴更换次数短于对照组,护士与患者之间的交流频次多于对照组,对当前所享受到的照护服务满意度高于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<005)。结论 家属共同参与式结对护理方案应用于行PICC置管肺癌患者,能提高PICC导管的维护成效,且能降低不良事件的发生率,值得在临床上做进一步推广。     

流程管理在PICC申报与置管中的应用

目的：规范PICC申报与置管的管理,提高置管成功率,降低并发症的发生率。方法：制定PICC申报与置管监控流程,并在临床实践中不断优化和完善。结果：流程管理使PICC置管规范化,其置管的成功率与并发症的发生率,与实施流程管理前比较有显著性差异（P〈0.005）。结论：实施流程管理,使PICC申报与置管规范化,提高了置管成功率,降低了并发症发生率。     

流程管理在PICC申报与置管中的应用

目的:规范PICC申报与置管的管理,提高置管成功率,降低并发症的发生率。方法:制定PICC申报与置管监控流程,并在临床实践中不断优化和完善。结果:流程管理使PICC置管规范化,其置管的成功率与并发症的发生率,与实施流程管理前比较有显著性差异(P<0.005)。结论:实施流程管理,使PICC申报与置管规范化,提高了置管成功率,降低了并发症发生率。     

Central venous access related adverse events after trabectedin infusions in soft tissue sarcoma patients; experience and management in a nationwide multi-center study

Background

Trabectedin has shown efficacy against soft tissue sarcomas (STS) and has manageable toxicity. Trabectedin is administered through central venous access devices (VAD), such as subcutaneous ports with tunneled catheters, Hickman catheters and PICC lines. Venous access related adverse events are common, but have not yet been reported in detail.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patient files of STS patients receiving trabectedin monotherapy between 1999 and 2014 was performed in all five STS referral centers in the Netherlands. This survey focused on adverse events related to the VAD and the actions taken in response to these events.

Results

In the 127 patients included in this analysis, 102 venous access ports (VAP), 15 Hickman catheters and 10 PICC lines were used as primary means of central venous access. The most frequently reported adverse events at the VAD site were erythema (30.7%), pain (28.3%), inflammation (11.8%) and thrombosis (11.0%). Actions taken towards these adverse events include oral antibiotics (17.3%), VAD replacement (15.0%) or a wait-and-see policy (13.4%). In total, 45 patients (35.4%) with a subcutaneous port developed a varying degree of inflammation along the trajectory of the tunneled catheter. In all but three patients, this was a sterile inflammation, which was considered a unique phenomenon for trabectedin. Microscopic leakage of trabectedin along the venous access device and catheter was considered the most plausible cause for this adverse event. Placing the catheter deeper under the skin resolved the issue almost completely.

Conclusion

Trabectedin infusion commonly leads to central venous access related adverse events. Sterile inflammation along the catheter trajectory is one of the most common adverse events and can be prevented by placing the catheter deeper under the skin.

     

综合护理干预对胸外科PICC置管期间并发症的预防效果分析

目的:观察综合护理干预对胸外科PICC置管期间并发症的预防效果.方法:选取胸外科PICC置管患者46例,观察对比穿刺成功率及并发症发生率.结果:贵要静脉的穿刺成功率最高,占94.4％(17/18),并发症发生率最低,占5.6％(1/18).结论:对胸外科PICC置管期间给予综合护理干预,能有效预防置管期间并发症.     

宫颈癌患者PICC导管多重耐药菌感染的危险因素及病原学特征

目的 探讨宫颈癌患者经外周静脉穿刺中心静脉置管(PICC)导管多重耐药菌感染的危险因素及病原学特征.方法 选取宫颈癌PICC导管患者589例,回顾性观察纳入者相关资料,对PICC导管多重感染者加强监测,着重分析、归纳感染危险因素;同时监测和记录感染者病原学特征.结果 宫颈癌PICC导管相关性感染94例、感染率15.96...     

儿童急性淋巴细胞性白血病置入PICC最佳时机的探讨

目的：探讨急性淋巴细胞性白血病患儿置入PICC的最佳时机.方法：将我科2009年5月-2012年4月确诊为急性淋巴细胞性白血病患儿117名随机分为两组,观察组患儿置管时间选择在诱导缓解期第5-6天,对照组患儿置管时间为诱导缓解期第1-2天.观察两组患儿置管时的接受配合程度及置管1月内导管相关血流感染的发生例数.结果：两组患儿中,观察组患儿置管时接受配合程度明显高于对照组（P＜0.01）.观察组患儿1月内无1例导管相关血流感染发生,差别有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.结论：小儿急性淋巴性白血病置入PICC的最佳时机为诱导缓解期第5-6天.     

综合护理干预对胸外科PICC置管期问并发症的预防效果分析

目的：观察综合护理干预对胸外科PICC置管期间并发症的预防效果。方法：选取胸外科PICC置管患者46例,观察对比穿刺成功率及并发症发生率。结果：贵要静脉的穿刺成功率最高,占94．4％（17／18）,并发症发生率最低,占5．6％（1／18）。结论：对胸外科PICC置管期间给予综合护理干预,能有效预防置管期间并发症。     

Appropriate posture of cancer patients treated with PICC to prevent internal jugular vein ectopic

We aimed to study the appropriate posture of peripherally inserted central catheter （PICC） patients, to reduce the incidence of internal jugular vein heterotopia. Methods： From 2009 to 2013, a total of 290 cases with PICC were enrolled in our study. They were divided into two groups. The patients in control group took regular position, which mean pros- tration, upper limb of tube side was abduction 90°, head moved to puncture side in order to block the internal jugular vein. On the basis of conventional body position putting, posture of patients in observation group was improved, the head remain neutral, and had 180° angle with trunk longitudinal axis, not favor any side. After ensuring the upper limb abduction, had 90° angle with the trunk, then catheter was inserted slowly. The jugular venous catheter heterotopia rate was judged by X.ray results. Results： The jugular venous catheter heterotopia rate of control group and observation was 12.8% and 0.68%, respectively. The difference between two groups was statistically significant （P 〈 0.01）. Conclusion： The body posture improvement can prevent discomfort of patients and reduce the jugular venous catheter heterotopia rate of PICC.     

经外周插管的中心静脉导管的预处理对乳腺癌化疗患者机械性静脉炎发生率的影响

目的通过对导管的预处理及送管速度的控制,减少对血管内膜的刺激,以期降低机械性静脉炎的发生率。方法将需要插管化疗的女性乳癌患者分为两组,试验组对导管进行预处理,即插管前将导管浸泡在无菌生理盐水100ml加地塞米松5mg、利多卡因2ml的混合液中,时间1min,穿刺成功后缓慢匀速送入导管;对照组插管前导管不浸泡,穿刺成功后快速送入导管。结果对导管进行预处理之后,机械性静脉炎发生率由原来的26.7%降至10.7%,两组静脉炎的发生率差异有显著性(P(0.05)。结论插管前对导管进行浸泡、穿刺成功后缓慢匀速送管可以降低机械性静脉炎的发生率。     

置PICC管肿瘤患者的感受与需求

目的：调查置PICC管肿瘤患者的感受与需求,让患者能得到最优质的服务。方法：对168例置PICC管的患者进行问卷调查,调查内容分4部分21个问题,资料采用百分比形式。结果：患者最担心的问题是感染、疼痛、局部出血、堵管;对日常生活的影响是淋浴和更衣。需求是置管前应进行指导、宣教和置管后的观察与护理,并提高患者的自我护理能力。结论：PICC管是一项新的技术,将会受到工作人员的欢迎和患者的接受,因此护士应根据患者各自的心理、生理反应,深入了解患者的需求与感受,给予优质的个体化护理。     

A Frontline Approach With Peripherally Inserted Versus Centrally Inserted Central Venous Catheters for Remission Induction Chemotherapy Phase of Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Randomized Comparison

BackgroundThe incidence of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-related adverse events has been uncertain in the setting of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) compared with the incidence of centrally inserted central catheter (CICC) adverse events.Patients and MethodsWe conducted a monocentric, randomized trial of patients with previously untreated AML. Of the 93 patients, 46 had received a PICC and 47 had received a CICC as frontline intravascular device. Thereafter, all patients underwent intensive chemotherapy for hematologic remission induction. The primary endpoint was catheter-related (CR)-bloodstream infection (BSI) and venous thrombosis (VT) rate. The secondary endpoints catheter malfunction, catheter removal, and patient overall survival.ResultsThe CR-BSI and CR-VT rate in the PICC and CICC groups was 13% and 49%, respectively, with a difference of 36 percentage points (relative risk for CR-BSI or CR-VT, 0.266; P = .0003). The CR-BSI incidence was 1.4 and 7.8 per 1000 catheters daily in the PICC and CICC groups, respectively. Among the CR thromboses, the symptomatic VT rate was 2.1% in the PICC group and 10.6% in the CICC group. In the CICC group, 16 of the 47 patients (34%) had the catheter removed for BSI (n = 5), septic thrombophlebitis (n = 4), VT (n = 2), or malfunction (n = 5) a median of 7 days after insertion. In the PICC group, only 6 of the 46 patients (13%) required catheter removal for VT (n = 2) or malfunction (n = 4). At a median follow-up of 30 days, 6 patients in the CICC group died of CR complications versus none of the patients in the PICC group (P = .012). Using PICCs, the reduction in BSI and symptomatic VT decreased mortality from CR infection and venous thromboembolism. In contrast, the CICC approach led to early catheter removal mostly for difficult-to-treat infectious pathogens.ConclusionOur data have confirmed that BSI and symptomatic VT are the major complications affecting frontline central intravascular device-related morbidity in the leukemia setting. The use of a PICC is safer than that of a CICC and maintains the effectiveness for patients with AML undergoing chemotherapy, with an approximate fourfold lower combined risk of infection or thrombosis at 30 days.     

单腔PICC、双腔PICC及CVC导管在造血干细胞移植中应用的效果比较

目的:探讨单腔、双腔PICC及CVC导管在造血干细胞移植患者中的应用效果.方法:选取45例造血干细胞移植患者,根据患者置入中心静脉导管的不同,分为单腔PICC组(A组),双腔PICC组(B组)及锁骨下双腔CVC组(C组),对比三组患者在置管成功率,导管留置时间,并发症发生率等方面的差异.结果:PICC组(A组和B组)在置管安全性、留置时间、一次置管成功率上优于双腔CVC组(P<0.05);双腔CVC组局部血肿并发症的发生率明显高于A组和B组,而PICC组在静脉炎的发生率高于CVC组(P<0.05).结论:与锁骨下CVC及单腔PICC相比,双腔PICC既能满足异基因造血干细胞移植患者同时输注两路液体的需求,且有置管成功率高、并发症少、导管留置时间长的优点,值得在造血干细胞移植中推广应用.     

Comparison of the Quality of Life of Patients with Breast or Colon Cancer with an Arm Vein Port (TIVAD) Versus a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC)

Introduction: Venous access is a crucial element in chemotherapy delivery. It remains unclear whether cancer patients prefer a port to a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC). Our study aimed to assess cancer patients’ satisfaction with their venous access device and to compare the quality of life (QoL) of subjects with a PICC to those with a port. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, EORTC QLQ-C30, and a locally developed quality of life survey (QLAVD), designed to assess satisfaction with venous access devices, were administered to breast or colorectal cancer patients over a one-year period following the device insertion. Mixed effects models were used to assess changes on mean scores at different time points. Results: A total of 101 patients were recruited over a three-year period, (PICC group, n = 50; port group, n = 51). Survey response rates for months one and three were 72% and 48%, respectively. Overall, no significant differences were noted between the two groups in relation to EORTC QOL. At three months, the mean pain scores were 3.5 ± 2.3 for the port and 1.3 ± 0.75 for PICC (<0.001). The mean score for a negative effect of the venous access device on psychosocial well-being was 6.0 ± 4.1 for PICC and 3.0 ± 2.7 for the port (p = 0.005). Complications related to PICCs occurred in 38% patients versus 41% with a port (p > 0.24). Conclusions: Although subjects with a port experienced more pain during the device insertion or access for chemotherapy, it had a smaller negative impact on psychosocial scores than the PICC. No significant differences in complications rates were observed between the two devices.     

PICC防治化学治疗所致静脉炎的初步研究

目的 :探讨PICC在 5 FU持续静脉滴入 48h(DeGramont方案 )所致外周静脉炎中的应用价值。方法 :65例患者 ,随机分为对照组 3 5例 ,于滴入期间每隔 4h推注肝素盐水稀释液 10mL ;PICC组 3 0例 ,采用PICC进行持续滴入。两组病例的一般临床分布基本均衡。结果 :PICC组静脉炎仅为 2例 ,较对照组 2 6% (9/3 5 )为低 ,P =0 0 41,均无Ⅲ、Ⅳ度静脉炎 ;两组人均治疗总费用相似 ,1986 5 8元vs 182 0 73元 ,P =0 0 60。结论 :PICC能有效地预防DeGramont方案所致静脉炎 ,且不增加治疗的总费用 ,值得临床推广应用     

腹部肿瘤围手术期试用PICC导管胃肠外营养研究

目的 前瞻性研究外周静脉穿刺中心静脉导管临床应用的可行性。方法 分别对３３例和３０例腹部恶性肿瘤围手术期患者,随机应用了经肘部静脉穿刺置入ＰＩＣＣ导管和经锁骨下静脉穿刺上腔静脉置管,实施胃肠外营养,比较两种导管的优劣。结果 ＰＩＣＣ置管组与锁骨下静脉穿刺上腔静脉穿刺置管组相比,两组置管成功率基本相似,均无导管阻塞发生,且ＰＩＣＣ置管组无严重穿刺并发症,无中途脱管现象,导管留置时间较长（Ｐ〈０．０５