Infectious complications in home parenteral nutrition: A long-term study with peripherally inserted central catheters, tunneled catheters, and ports.

OBJECTIVE: Home parenteral nutrition (HPN) has become a common therapy, with tunneled central venous catheters (CVCs) being the preferred route of administration. Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) have been used increasingly, but whether they should be preferred over other types of CVCs is still controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate catheter-related complications of CVC in patients receiving HPN. METHODS: All patients treated at our center for HPN from 2007 to 2017 were prospectively included. A specialized intravenous therapy team took care of these patients. Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) were confirmed with positive, simultaneous, differential blood cultures drawn through the CVC and peripheral vein and then semiquantitative or quantitative culture of the catheter tip. RESULTS: In all, 151 patients received HPN during the 11-y study period. Of these patients, 95 were women (63%) and 55 were men (37%), with a mean age of 58 ± 13 y. Twenty-six were non-cancer patients (17%) and the remaining 125 patients had an underlying malignancy (83%). Regarding the CVC, 116 were PICCs, 18 Hickman, and 36 ports. Confirmed CRBSI per catheter-days showed 0.15 episodes per 1000 catheter-days for PICCs, 0.72 for Hickman, and 2.02 for ports. PICCs had less-confirmed CRBSIs per 1000 catheter-days than ports (φ = 0.54, P = 0.005), but no difference between PICCs and Hickman was found (φ = 0.32, P = 0.110). Confirmed episodes of CRBSI (2 versus 13%, χ2 = 6.625, P = 0.036) were more frequent with multilumen catheters. CONCLUSIONS: In our setting, single-lumen PICC and Hickman catheters showed low infectious complications.

[Intracavitary electrocardiogram (IC-ECG) guidance for peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) placement]. / Colocación de catéteres centrales de inserción periférica (PICC) mediante control electrocardiográfico intracavitario (ECG-IC) de la punta del catéter.

INTRODUCTION: intracavitary electrocardiogram (IC-ECG) guidance has been recently proposed for peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) placement since it may reduce the time of placement and avoid radiological control. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate IC-ECG compared to conventional radiological control. METHOS: prospective study of 532 consecutive patients. Those with arrhythmias or on antiarrhythmic drugs were excluded. In all cases, PICC tip placement was checked by IC-ECG guidance and by a chest X-ray, which was considered as the reference test. RESULTS: PICC placement with IC-ECG guidance was achieved in 96.8% of patients (applicability). PICC correct placement according to IC-ECG guidance was confirmed by chest X-ray in 94% of patients (accuracy). In 13 patients (2.7%) the catheter had to be repositioned after radiological control. The κ concordance index was 0.356 (p < 0.001). The IC-ECG sensitivity was 0.98, with a PPV of 0.97 and a positive likelihood ratio of 1.5. However, the specificity was only 0.35 with a NPV of 0.41 and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.06. CONCLUSION: PICC placement by IC-ECG guidance is plausible, safe, presents adequate indexes of validity and reliability, and allows reducing the time of catheter placement. However, radiological verification is still necessary, especially in cases of negative or uncertain ECG.

INTRODUCCIÓN: recientemente se ha planteado la posibilidad de comprobar la colocación de los catéteres centrales de inserción periférica (PICC) mediante control electrocardiográfico intracavitario (ECG-IC) ya que permitiría disminuir el tiempo de colocación y evitaría el control radiológico. OBJETIVO: evaluación de dicho método frente al control radiológico habitual. MÉTODOS: estudio prospectivo en el que se incluyeron 532 pacientes de forma consecutiva. Se excluyeron aquellos pacientes con arritmias o en tratamiento con fármacos antiarrítmicos. En todos los casos se comprobó la colocación de la punta del PICC mediante control ECG-IC y mediante la realización de una radiografía de tórax, que fue considerada método de referencia. RESULTADOS: la colocación del PICC gracias al control ECG-IC (aplicabilidad) fue del 96,8%. La correcta colocación del PICC gracias a la interpretación del ECG-IC se confirmó en un 94% de los casos con la radiografía de tórax (precisión). En 13 pacientes (2,7%) se requirió la recolocación del catéter tras el control radiológico. El índice κ de concordancia fue de 0,356 (p < 0,001). La sensibilidad del método ECG fue de 0,98, con un VPP de 0,97 y un cociente de probabilidad positivo de 1,5. Sin embargo, la especificidad fue solo del 0,35 con un VPN de 0,41 y un cociente de probabilidad negativo de 0,06. CONCLUSIÓN: la comprobación de la colocación de los PICC mediante ECG-IC es plausible, segura, presenta unos índices de validez/fiabilidad adecuados y permitiría disminuir el tiempo de colocación del catéter. Sin embargo, la comprobación radiológica sigue siendo necesaria, especialmente en los casos de ECG negativo o dudoso.