The safety of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in critically ill patients: A retrospective observational study

Link to article at PubMed

J Vasc Access. 2023 Apr 18:11297298231169059. doi: 10.1177/11297298231169059. Online ahead of print.


BACKGROUND: Centrally inserted central venous catheters (CICCs) are commonly placed in critically ill patients who require a central venous catheter (CVC). Recently, peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) have been widely used on general wards. However, the safety of PICCs in critically ill patients remains unclear.

METHOD: We conducted a retrospective observational study at a mixed intensive care unit (ICU). Adult patients (⩾18 years) who were emergently admitted to the ICU and underwent CVC insertion between April 2019 and March 2021 were enrolled. We compared the safety of PICCs and CICCs. The primary outcome was the overall rate of catheter-related complications, including bloodstream infections, thrombosis, insertional trauma, catheter malfunction, and accidental removal. We used a stabilized inverse probability weighting (sIPW) model to estimate the effects of PICC use.

RESULTS: A total of 239 CVCs (PICCs, 53; CICCs, 186) were inserted into 229 patients. Although the severity of illness did not differ significantly between the groups, the length of hospital stay and mean indwelling catheter duration were significantly longer in the PICC group. There was no significant intergroup difference in the overall rate of catheter-related complications (PICC: 9.4% vs CICC: 3.8%; odds ratio [OR]: 2.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63-10.2, p = 0.145), and there were 7.7 and 9.0 complications per 1000 catheter days in the PICC and CICC groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.14-2.65, p = 0.513). After adjustment using the sIPW model, PICC use was not found to be associated with a reduction in catheter-related complications (adjusted OR: 3.10; 95% CI: 0.90-10.7; adjusted HR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.14-1.97).

CONCLUSION: We found no significant differences in catheter-related complications between patients treated using CICCs and those treated using PICCs after emergency ICU admission. Our findings imply that PICCs may be an alternative to CICCs in critically ill patients.

PMID:37070255 | DOI:10.1177/11297298231169059

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *