Can Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters Be Safely Placed in Patients with Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy? A Retrospective Study of Almost 400,000 Catheter-Days

Author:

Campagna Sara1,Gonella Silvia2,Berchialla Paola3,Morano Giacomo4,Rigo Carla5,Zerla Pietro Antonio6,Fuzzi Raffaella7,Corona Gianvito8,Storto Silvana4,Dimonte Valerio12,Mussa Baudolino2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Public Health and Pediatrics, University of Torino, Torino, Italy

2. Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy

3. Department of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy

4. Azienda Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy

5. Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy

6. Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Melegnano e della Martesana, Vizzolo Predabissi, Italy

7. Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale Romagna sede di Forlì, Forlì, Italy

8. Azienda Sanitaria Provinciale Potenza, Potenza, Italy

Abstract

Abstract Background Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are central venous catheters (CVCs) that are commonly used in onco-hematologic settings for chemotherapy administration. As there is insufficient evidence to recommend a specific CVC for chemotherapy administration, we aimed to ascertain PICC-related adverse events (AEs) and identify independent predictors of PICC removal in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. Materials and Methods Information on adult patients with cancer with a PICC inserted for chemotherapy administration between September 2007 and December 2014 was extracted from six hospital databases. The primary outcome was PICC removal due to PICC-related AEs (occlusion, infection, or symptomatic thrombosis). Independent predictors of PICC removal were identified using a multivariate Cox regression model. Results Among the 2,477 included patients, 419 PICC-related AEs (16.9%; 1.09 AEs per 1,000 PICC-days) were reported. AEs increased when PICC was inserted at the brachial site (hazard ratio [HR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.84) and with open systems (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.24–2.88) and decreased in older men (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.49–0.81). Conclusion Use of PICC for chemotherapy administration was associated with a low all-AEs rate. The basilic vein was the safer site, and valved systems had fewer AEs than open systems. More research is needed to explore the interaction between AEs, sex, and age. Implications for Practice These findings provide clinicians with evidence that peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are safe for chemotherapy administration. They also suggest that clinicians should limit the use of open systems when long chemotherapy regimens are scheduled. Moreover, alternatives to PICCs should be considered when administering chemotherapy to young men.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3