+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

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



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



Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma and Leukemia 2019



The 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. We 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. The 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. Our 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.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 066446989

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 30704933

DOI: 10.1016/j.clml.2018.12.008


Related references

Comparison of complication rates of Hickman(®) catheters versus peripherally inserted central catheters in patients with acute myeloid leukemia undergoing induction chemotherapy. Leukemia and Lymphoma 54(6): 1263-1267, 2013

Incidence of catheter-related thrombosis in acute leukemia patients: a comparative, retrospective study of the safety of peripherally inserted vs. centrally inserted central venous catheters. Annals of Hematology 95(12): 2057-2064, 2016

Central venous pressure measurements: Peripherally inserted catheters versus centrally inserted catheters. Critical Care Medicine 28(12): 3833-3836, 2000

Central venous pressure measurements: peripherally inserted catheters versus centrally inserted catheters. Critical Care Medicine 28(12): 3833-3836, 2001

Peripherally inserted central catheters are equivalent to centrally inserted catheters in intensive care unit patients for central venous pressure monitoring. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 26(2): 85-90, 2012

Complication rates among peripherally inserted central venous catheters and centrally inserted central catheters in the medical intensive care unit. Journal of Critical Care 31(1): 238-242, 2016

Peripherally inserted central catheters for calcium requirements after successful parathyroidectomy: a comparison with centrally inserted catheters. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England 99(5): 358-362, 2017

Peripherally inserted central catheters for parenteral nutrition: a comparison with centrally inserted catheters. Jpen. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 23(2): 85-89, 1999

Comparison of catheter-related large vein thrombosis in centrally inserted versus peripherally inserted central venous lines in the neurological intensive care unit. Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery 115(7): 879-882, 2014

Effective vascular access via peripherally inserted central venous catheters in patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 92(10 Suppl. 1 Part 1-2): 612A, 1998

Central Venous Pressure From Peripherally Inserted Central catheters Correlates Well With That of Centrally Inserted Central Catheters. Chest Journal 126(4): 873sa-1-873sa-2, 2004

Vascular access via peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs): experience in 40 patients with acute myeloid leukemia at a single institute. Leukemia and Lymphoma 40(3-4): 365-371, 2001

Comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) versus subcutaneously implanted port-chamber catheters by complication and cost for patients receiving chemotherapy for non-haematological malignancies. Supportive Care in Cancer 22(1): 121-128, 2014

Prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin reduces the risk for catheter-related venous thrombosis in cancer patients with centrally but not peripherally inserted central venous catheters for administration of chemotherapy. European Journal of Cancer 37(Suppl. 6): S354-S355, 2001

Central venous catheters for infusion therapy in gastrointestinal cancer. A comparative study of tunnelled centrally placed catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters. Journal of Intravenous Nursing 24(1): 38-47, 2002