PEDIATRICS Vol. 99 No. 2 February 1997,
p. e4
Copyright ©1997 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
ELECTRONIC ARTICLE:
Survey of the Use of Peripherally Inserted Central Venous
Catheters in Children
, and
From the * Department of Anesthesiology, University of
Washington School of Medicine, Department of Anesthesia and Critical
Care, Children's Hospital and Medical Center, Seattle, Washington; and
the
Department of Nursing, Children's Hospital and Medical Center,
Seattle, Washington.
Objective. Use of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) to provide prolonged intravenous (IV) access in children is increasing. Our goal was to describe the children treated with PICCs in our institution, and to study catheter features such as catheter life, completion of therapy, and complications. Furthermore, we also evaluated PICC use in children completing therapy after discharge from our institution.
Methods. A prospective study of all PICCs inserted at the Children's Hospital and Medical Center (CHMC), a university-affiliated teaching institution, during a period of 18 months (January 1994 to July 1995).
Results. A total of 441 PICCs were inserted in 390 patients. Patient age ranged from 0 to 22 years with a mean of 5.4 ± 6.0 years. No insertion complications occurred. Treatment of infectious disease (46%) was the most frequent reason for PICC insertion. All pediatric medical and surgical services used PICCs. Average catheter life was 13 ± 12 days. Sixty-one percent of PICCs were used entirely at CHMC, while 39% were also used at home or at an outside hospital. Completion of therapy was achieved in 69% of PICCs. Among children who completed therapy outside our hospital, there was no difference in the rates of occlusion, accidental dislodgment, or infection.
One hundred twenty-nine (29%) PICCs were removed for complications. Occlusion (7%), accidental displacement (8%), and suspicion of sepsis (8%) were the most common complications. Only 2% of PICCs had documented catheter-associated sepsis.
Conclusions. PICCs provide reliable and safe access for prolonged IV therapy in neonates and children. The low incidence of complications with PICCs make them an attractive device for prolonged IV access. Similar complication rates with use in and out of hospital suggest that home IV therapy can be safely delivered with PICCs, avoiding expensive hospitalization. peripherally inserted central venous catheter, vascular access, catheter related sepsis, completion of therapy, occlusion, accidental dislodgment, home therapy, phlebitis.
Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) are frequently used to provide prolonged intravenous (IV) access in both acute and home care settings. Shaw described PICC use in 1973 as a method of providing reliable vascular access for total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in neonates.1,2 PICCs were subsequently used to provide IV access for administration of prolonged antibiotic courses in children with cystic fibrosis during pulmonary exacerbations.3 PICCs lasted twice as long as conventional peripheral IV cannulae, reducing the number of venipunctures by half and enabling home therapy.3 PICC utilization has continued to increase because these catheters are easy to insert and have a low incidence of complications compared with other surgically placed central lines.2,4
PICCs are made of biocompatible material, usually polyurethane or silicone. Insertion is simple and is usually done by nursing personnel who have completed a recommended certification process.6 The success rate for insertion of PICCs ranges from 78% to 92%.4,5,11,12 Veins of the antecubital fossa are commonly used; however, the saphenous, axillary, or even scalp veins can be used.3,6,9 Complications associated with PICC insertion are infrequent, but include bleeding, tendon or nerve damage, cardiac arrhythmias, chest pain, catheter malposition, and catheter embolism.5
Few studies have examined the use of these catheters in a large pediatric population. We examined PICC utilization in a university-affiliated children's hospital. Our goals were to describe the patient population treated with PICCs as well as catheter features such as average catheter life, completion of therapy, reasons for removal, and complications. Finally, we compared PICC-related data of children receiving therapy at home, or at an outside hospital, with those hospitalized for the entire time of PICC use.
Information was prospectively collected on all PICCs inserted at Seattle Children's Hospital and Medical Center (CHMC) during an 18-month period from January 1994 to July 1995. PICCs were inserted primarily by the IV nursing team. Referrals for catheter placement occurred at the discretion of the patient's primary physician and were made directly to the IV team.
2 and Fisher's exact tests.
Significance was defined as P < .05.
A total of 444 PICCs were inserted in 390 patients during the 18-month period. Data was complete for 441 of 444 PICC insertions. Demographic information of the study subjects is presented in Table 1. The median age of patients in the group was 3.4 years (range 0 days to 22 years). No complication from insertion was noted.
|
Table 1. Patient Demographic Information |
Table 2.
Catheter Characteristics
Table 3.
Antecedent Diagnosis
Table 4.
Referring Services
Table 5.
Reason for Removal of Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters:
CHMC vs Outside Use
10 during use at CHMC compared with 6 during outside
use. Patients whose PICCs were removed for exit site infection or
phlebitis did not have fever or other signs of systemic sepsis.
Our study demonstrated that PICCs are a safe and reliable IV access device in neonates and children. They are also safe in the home setting if parents and home nursing personnel are properly instructed in catheter care and recognition of catheter complications.
Received for publication Apr 19, 1996; accepted Jul 16, 1996.
Address correspondence to: Susan L. Bratton, MD, MPH, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Children's Hospital and Medical Center, 4800 Sandpoint Way NE, Seattle, WA 98105.
- Shaw JCL. Parenteral nutrition in the management of sick low birthweight infants. In: Gluck L, ed. Pediatr Clin North Am. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company; 1973;20:333-358
-
Puntis JWL
Percutaneous insertion of central venous feeding catheters.
Arch Dis Child.
1986;
61:1138-1140
[Free Full Text] -
Williams J,
Smith HL,
Woods CG,
Weller PH
Silastic catheters for
antibiotics in cystic fibrosis.
Arch Dis Child.
1988;
63:658-659 [Medline]
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Sheppard R, Ong TH Evaluation of percutaneously inserted peripheral silicone catheters for parental nutrition in infants and children. Aust Paediatr J. 1980; 16:181-184[Medline]
-
Dolcourt JL,
Bose CL
Percutaneous insertion of silastic central venous
catheters in newborn.
Pediatrics.
1980;
70:484-486
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Frey AM Pediatric peripherally inserted central catheter program report. J Intraven Nurs. 1995; 18:280-291 [Medline][Medline]
- Brown JM Peripherally inserted central catheters use in home care. J Intraven Nurs. 1989; 12:144-147 [Medline][Medline]
- Dietrich KA, Lobas JG Use of single silastic IV catheter for cystic fibrosis pulmonary exacerbations. Pediatr Pulmonol. 1988; 4:181-184 [Medline][Medline]
-
Lam S,
Scannell R,
Roessler D,
Smith M
Peripherally inserted central
catheters in an acute-care hospital.
Arch Intern Med.
1994;
154:1833-1837 [Medline]
[Abstract/Free Full Text] -
Giufrida DJ,
Bryan-Brown CW,
Lumb PD,
Kwun KB,
Rhoades HM
Central vs
peripheral venous catheters in critically ill patients.
Chest.
1986;
90:806-809
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Kyle SK, Myers JS Peripherally inserted central catheters: Development of a hospital based program. J Intraven Nurs. 1990; 13:287-290[Medline]
- Markel S, Reynen K Impact on patient care: 2652 PIC catheter days in the alternative setting. J Intraven Nurs. 1990; 13:347-351 [Medline][Medline]
- Rutherford C A study of single lumen peripherally inserted central line catheter dwelling time and complications. J Intraven Nurs. 1988; 11:169-173 [Medline][Medline]
- Orr ME. Issues in the management of percutaneous central venous catheters. In: Fulton JS, ed. Nurs Clin North Am. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company; 1993;28:911-919
- Loughran SC, Edwards S, McClure S Peripherally inserted central catheters. Guidewire versus nonguidewire use: a comparative study. J Intraven Nurs. 1992; 15:152-159 [Medline] [Medline]
Pediatrics (ISSN 0031 4005). Copyright ©1997 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||




