Document Detail

Risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection with peripherally inserted central venous catheters used in hospitalized patients.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  16100130     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) are now widely used for intermediate and long-term access in current-day health care, especially in the inpatient setting, where they are increasingly supplanting conventional central venous catheters (CVCs) placed percutaneously into the internal jugular, subclavian, or femoral veins. Data on the risk of PICC-related bloodstream infection (BSI) with PICCs used in hospitalized patients are limited. STUDY OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk of PICC-related BSI in hospitalized patients. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using data from two randomized trials assessing the efficacy of chlorhexidine-impregnated sponge dressing and chlorhexidine for cutaneous antisepsis. METHODS: PICCs inserted into the antecubital vein in two randomized trials during from 1998 to 2000 were prospectively studied; most patients were in an ICU. PICC-related BSI was confirmed in each case by demonstrating concordance between isolates colonizing the PICC at the time of removal and from blood cultures by restriction-fragment DNA subtyping. RESULTS: Overall, 115 patients had 251 PICCs placed. Mean duration of catheterization was 11.3 days (total, 2,832 PICC-days); 42% of the patients were in an ICU at some time, 62% had urinary catheters, and 49% had received mechanical ventilation. Six PICC-related BSIs were identified (2.4%), four with coagulase-negative staphylococcus, one with Staphylococcus aureus, and one with Klebsiella pneumoniae, a rate of 2.1 per 1,000 catheter-days. CONCLUSION: This prospective study shows that PICCs used in high-risk hospitalized patients are associated with a rate of catheter-related BSI similar to conventional CVCs placed in the internal jugular or subclavian veins (2 to 5 per 1,000 catheter-days), much higher than with PICCs used exclusively in the outpatient setting (approximately 0.4 per 1,000 catheter-days), and higher than with cuffed and tunneled Hickman-like CVCs (approximately 1 per 1,000 catheter-days). A randomized trial of PICCs and conventional CVCs in hospitalized patients requiring central access is needed. Our data raise the question of whether the growing trend in many hospital hematology and oncology services to switch from use of cuffed and tunneled CVCs to PICCs is justified, particularly since PICCs are more vulnerable to thrombosis and dislodgment, and are less useful for drawing blood specimens. Moreover, PICCs are not advisable in patients with renal failure and impending need for dialysis, in whom preservation of upper-extremity veins is needed for fistula or graft implantation.
Nasia Safdar; Dennis G Maki
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Chest     Volume:  128     ISSN:  0012-3692     ISO Abbreviation:  Chest     Publication Date:  2005 Aug 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2005-08-15     Completed Date:  2005-09-06     Revised Date:  2006-11-15    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  0231335     Medline TA:  Chest     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  489-95     Citation Subset:  AIM; IM    
Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison, USA.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Bacteremia / epidemiology,  etiology*
Catheterization, Central Venous / adverse effects*
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Risk Factors

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Oxidative stress is responsible for mitochondrial permeability transition induction by salicylate in...
Next Document:  Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation...