Author:
Kamata Yuko,Mizuno Yuki,Okamoto Kentaro,Okamoto Shota,Ito Yoshifumi,Nishigata Aya
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
Tunneled central venous catheters (TCVs) are commonly used for pediatric chemotherapy. Recently, peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) have been used instead. Although PICC has the advantages of simpler insertion and fewer severe complications, there is little information on the efficacy of PICC compared to TCV in pediatric chemotherapy.
Methods
Patients, aged younger than 18 years, with primary malignancy who received chemotherapy with PICC or TCV at our institution from December 2007 to August 2022 were included in the study. We retrospectively compared PICC and TCV using medical records.
Results
Within the observation period, 133 catheters (73 PICCs and 60 TCVs) were inserted. The median indwelling time was 99 days for PICCs and 182 days for TCVs, with TCVs being significantly longer (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications, such as infections, thrombosis, obstruction, or mechanical accidents. Comparing patients treated with PICC (PICC group) versus those with TCV (TCV group), the time from diagnosis to insertion was significantly shorter in the PICC group (p < 0.001). In the PICC group, none of the patients required general anesthesia, and chemotherapy was completed with PICC only.
Conclusion
PICC can be an alternative to TCV in pediatric chemotherapy.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Medicine,Surgery,Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献