Common incidence of catheter-related venous thrombosis between midline catheter and peripherally inserted central catheter：a Meta-analysis

doi:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2024.04.005

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To compare the incidence of catheter-related venous thrombosis between midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters. Methods Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies on the incidence of venous thrombosis associated with midline catheters and PICC catheters were searched from CNKI，Wanfang database，VIP database，Web of Science，PubMed，Embase and Cochrane Library from inception to December 31,2022. Review Manager 5.4 software and Stata 14.0 software were used to analyse and describe the outcome indicators. Results A total of 16 studies were included，including 12 cohort studies and 4 randomized controlled studies，with 21853 subjects. The results of the Meta-analysis showed that the incidence of catheter-related venous thrombosis per thousand catheter days of midline catheters was statistically significant compared with PICC[RR=2.74，95%CI（1.21，6.21），P=0.016]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of catheter-related venous thrombosis compared with PICC[RR=0.85，95%CI=（0.70，1.03），P=0.101]. In the subgroups，the incidence of superficial vein thrombosis in the midline catheter was significantly different from that in the PICC[RR=2.36，95%CI=（1.56，3.58），P<0.001]. Conclusion The current evidence shows that the incidence rate of catheter-related venous thrombosis per thousand catheter days and superficial vein thrombosis was higher for midline catheters than PICCs. Therefore，in clinical practice，vascular access devices should be selected reasonably，and the occurrence and development of catheter-related superficial venous thrombosis should be paid attention to，and clinical screening should be effectively carried out on the basis of a full evaluation.

Key words: Midline Catheter, Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter, Venous Thromboembolism, Catheter-Related Venous Thrombosis, Meta-Analysis, Evidence-Based Nursing

摘要：

目的比较中长导管和PICC在导管相关性静脉血栓发生率的差异。方法检索中国知网、万方数据库、维普数据库、Web of Science、PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library中关于患者应用中长导管与PICC导管相关性静脉血栓发生率的随机对照试验、队列研究，检索时限为建库至2022年12月31日。使用Review Manager 5.4软件和Stata 14.0软件对结局指标进行Meta分析与描述。结果共纳入16项研究，队列研究12项，随机对照研究4项，包括21 853例研究对象。Meta分析结果显示，中长导管、PICC的每千导管日的导管相关性静脉血栓发生率比较，差异具有统计学意义[RR=2.74，95%CI（1.21，6.21），P=0.016]；中长导管、PICC的导管相关性静脉血栓发生率比较，差异无统计学意义[RR=0.85，95%CI=（0.70，1.03），P=0.101]。在亚组分析中，中长导管、PICC的浅静脉血栓发生率比较，差异具有统计学意义[RR=2.36，95%CI=（1.56，3.58），P<0.001]。结论中长导管的导管相关性静脉血栓发生率高于PICC。故在临床实践中，应合理选择血管通装置，重视导管相关性静脉血栓的发生和发展，在充分评估的基础上有效开展临床筛查。

关键词: 中长导管, 经外周静脉置入中心静脉导管, 静脉血栓栓塞, 导管相关性静脉血栓, Meta分析, 循证护理学

HE Wenjing, WANG Dandan, WANG Wen, YANG Xuhong, SHEN Li, ZHAO Wenjing. Common incidence of catheter-related venous thrombosis between midline catheter and peripherally inserted central catheter：a Meta-analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2024, 59(4): 416-524.

贺文静, 王丹丹, 王文, 杨旭红, 沈犁, 赵文静. 中长导管与PICC导管相关性静脉血栓发生率比较的Meta分析[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2024, 59(4): 416-524.

Figures/Tables 7

Figure 1 Search strategies of PubMed

Figure 2 Flow chart of literature search

Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies（n=16）

Table 2 Methodological quality assessment for the included RCTs（n=4）

Table 3 Methodological quality assessment for the included cohort studies（n=12）

Figure 3 Forest plot of the incidence of CRVT in a meta-analysis of 2 types of venous access devices

Figure 4 Forest plot of the incidence of CRVT per thousand catheter days in a meta-analysis of 2 types of venous access devices

References 39

[1]	Presley B, Isenberg JD. Ultrasound guided intravenous access[M]. Statpearls. Treasure Island(FL): StatPearls Publishing Copyright, 2023.
[2]	国家统计局. 中国统计年鉴[M]. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2022.
	National Bureau of Statistics of China. China statistical yearbook[M]. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2022.
[3]	王栋, 罗平, 刘韶, 等. 住院患者静脉输液专项管理实践[J]. 中国卫生质量管理, 2022, 29(5):34-37.
	Wang D, Luo P, Liu S, et al. Special management practice of intravenous infusion for inpatients[J]. Chin Health Qual Manag, 2022, 29(5):34-37.
[4]	Kuang Z, Liu X, Zhu Y, et al. A retrospective cohort study of disease-related risk factors for central venous catheter-related symptomatic thrombosis in intensive care unit inpatients[J]. Medicine, 2021, 100(29):e26732. DOI URL
[5]	吴文瑾, 徐亦虹, 柳小琳, 等. 中心静脉置管患者导管相关性血栓风险预测模型的系统评价[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(23):2834-2842. DOI
	Wu WJ, Xu YH, Liu XL, et al. Systematic review of risk pre-diction models for catheter-related thrombosis in patients undergoing central venous catheterization[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2022, 57(23):2834-2842.
[6]	李慧妍, 邵群, 张志仁. 导管相关性血栓研究进展[J]. 肿瘤综合治疗电子杂志, 2019, 5(3):8-12.
	Li HY, Shao Q, Zhang ZR. Progress of catheter-related thrombosis[J]. J Multidiscip Cancer Manag, 2019, 5(3):8-12.
[7]	李乾, 赵欣, 张晓维, 等. 国内成人肿瘤患者PICC相关性血栓发生率的Meta分析[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(3):348-355. DOI
	Li Q, Zhao X, Zhang XW, et al. Incidence of peripherally inserted central catheter-related thrombosis in Chinese adult cancer patients:a meta-analysis[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2022, 57(3):348-355.
[8]	赵林芳, 蔡志云, 樊小朋, 等. 中等长度静脉导管置管不同尖端位置的效果比较[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(5):517-524. DOI
	Zhao LF, Cai ZY, Fan XP, et al. Application comparison of different tip positions of midline catheters[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2022, 57(5):517-524. DOI
[9]	Lescinskas EH, Trautner BW, Saint S, et al. Use of and patient-reported complications related to midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters[J]. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol, 2020, 41(5):608-610. DOI URL
[10]	Bing S, Smotherman C, Rodriguez RG, et al. PICC versus midlines:comparison of peripherally inserted central catheters and midline catheters with respect to incidence of thromboembolic and infectious complications[J]. Am J Surg, 2022, 223(5):983-987. DOI URL
[11]	Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials[J]. BMJ(Clinical research ed), 2011, 343:d5928.
[12]	Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses[J]. Eur J Epidemiol, 2010, 25(9):603-605. DOI PMID
[13]	Bahl A, Karabon P, Chu D. Comparison of venous thrombosis complications in midlines versus peripherally inserted central catheters:are midlines the safer option?[J]. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost, 2019, 25:1076029619839150.
[14]	Caparas JV, Hu JP. Safe administration of vancomycin through a novel midline catheter:a randomized,prospective clinical trial[J]. J Vasc Access, 2014, 15(4):251-256. DOI PMID
[15]	Lisova K, Paulinova V, Zemanova K, et al. Experiences of the first PICC team in the czech republic[J]. Br J Nurs, 2015, 24(2):S4,s6,s10.
[16]	Sebolt J, Buchinger J, Govindan S, et al. Patterns of vascular access device use and thrombosis outcomes in patients with COVID-19:a pilot Multi-site study of Michigan hospitals[J]. J Thromb Thrombolysis, 2022, 53(2):257-263. DOI
[17]	Seo H, Altshuler D, Dubrovskaya Y, et al. The safety of midline catheters for intravenous therapy at a large academic medical center[J]. Ann Pharmacother, 2020, 54(3):232-238. DOI PMID
[18]	Sharp R, Esterman A, McCutcheon H, et al. The safety and efficacy of midlines compared to peripherally inserted central catheters for adult cystic fibrosis patients:a retrospective,observational study[J]. Int J Nurs Stud, 2014, 51(5):694-702. DOI URL
[19]	Swaminathan L, Flanders S, Horowitz J, et al. Safety and outcomes of midline catheters vs peripherally inserted central catheters for patients with short-term indications:a multicenter study[J]. JAMA Intern Med, 2022, 182(1):50-58. DOI URL
[20]	Tao F, Wang X, Liu J, et al. Perioperative application of midline catheter and PICC in patients with gastrointestinal tumors[J]. J BUON, 2019, 24(6):2546-2552. PMID
[21]	Tso AR, Patniyot IR, Gelfand AA, et al. Increased rate of venous thrombosis may be associated with inpatient dihydroergotamine treatment[J]. Neurology, 2017, 89(3):279-283. DOI PMID
[22]	Xu T, Kingsley L, DiNucci S, et al. Safety and utilization of peripherally inserted central catheters versus midline catheters at a large academic medical center[J]. Am J Infect Control, 2016, 44(12):1458-1461. DOI PMID
[23]	Zerla PA, Canelli A, Caravella G, et al. Open-vs closed-tip valved peripherally inserted central catheters and midlines:findings from a vascular access database[J]. JAVA, 2015, 20(3):169-176. DOI URL
[24]	吕朋, 王媛媛, 杨立军, 等. 高龄肿瘤患者主动静脉治疗时应用不同血管通路装置输注发疱剂的安全效果[J]. 河北医药, 2021, 43(22):3448-3451.
	Lü P, Wang YY, Yang LJ, et al. The safety effect of bleb infusion through different vascular access devices in active vein therapy for elderly patients with neoplasm[J]. Hebei Med J, 2021, 43(22):3448-3451.
[25]	朱颖, 赵燕, 周燕妮, 等. 外周中等长度导管在神经外科患者中的应用效果[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2021, 25(2):40-42,58.
	Zhu Y, Zhao Y, Zhou YN, et al. Effect of peripheral medium length catheter applied in neurosurgical patients[J]. J Clin Med Pract, 2021, 25(2):40-42,58.
[26]	车肖文, 唐晓莲, 颜婧. 晚期肿瘤静脉营养支持患者应用改良型中等长度导管与PICC效果比较[J]. 临床与病理杂志, 2020, 40(9):2341-2344.
	Che XW, Tang XL, Yan J. Comparison of the effects of modi-fied midline catheter and PICC in patients with advanced tumor intravenous nutrition support[J]. J Clin Pathol Res, 2020, 40(9):2341-2344.
[27]	Moureau N, Chopra V. Indications for peripheral,midline and central catheters:summary of the magic recommendations[J]. Br J Nurs, 2016, 25(8):S15-24.
[28]	Pittiruti M, Scoppettuolo G. The GAVeCeLT manual of PICC and midline:indications,insertion,management[M]. Florida: Edra Publishing, 2017.
[29]	张星霞, 胡艳杰, 李卡. 经外周静脉穿刺置入中心静脉导管留置时间研究现状[J]. 护理研究, 2021, 35(11):1947-1950.
	Zhang XX, Hu YJ, Li K. Status quo of indwelling time of peripherally inserted central venous catheters[J]. Chin Nurs Res, 2021, 35(11):1947-1950.
[30]	Tripathi S, Kumar S, Kaushik S. The practice and complications of midline catheters:a systematic review[J]. Crit Care Med, 2021, 49(2):e140-e150. DOI PMID
[31]	Evans NS, Ratchford EV. Catheter-related venous thrombosis[J]. Vasc Med, 2018, 23(4):411-413. DOI PMID
[32]	Cosmi B. Management of superficial vein thrombosis[J]. J Thromb Haemost, 2015, 13(7):1175-1183. DOI PMID
[33]	Chen P, Zhu B, Wan G, et al. The incidence of asymptomatic thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central catheter in adults:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Nurs Open, 2021, 8(5):2249-2261. DOI URL
[34]	Decousus H, Quéré I, Presles E, et al. Superficial venous thrombosis and venous thromboembolism:a large,prospective epidemiologic study[J]. Ann Intern Med, 2010, 152(4):218-224. DOI PMID
[35]	Citla Sridhar D, Abou-Ismail MY, Ahuja SP. Central venous catheter-related thrombosis in children and adults[J]. Thromb Res, 2020, 187:103-112. DOI PMID
[36]	Duijzer D, de Winter MA, Nijkeuter M, et al. Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis and asymptomatic vein occlusion in patients with transvenous leads:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Front Cardiovasc Med, 2021, 8:698336. DOI URL
[37]	Skulec R, Kohlova A, Miksova L, et al. The reliability of ultrasound compression test performed by general ICU nurses in the critically ill patients:a preliminary prospective clinical study[J]. Eur J Intern Med, 2020, 76:130-131. DOI PMID
[38]	Schafer K, Goldschmidt E, Oostra D, et al. Defining the role of risk stratification and duplex ultrasound in the diagnosis of acute lower extremity deep vein thrombosis[J]. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord, 2022, 10(5):1021-1027.
[39]	Gornik HL, Gerhard-Herman MD, Misra S, et al. ACCF/ACR/AIUM/ASE/IAC/SCAI/SCVS/SIR/SVM/SVS/SVU 2013 appropriate use criteria for peripheral vascular ultrasound and physiological testing part ii:testing for venous disease and evaluation of hemodialysis access:a report of the American college of cardiology foundation appropriate use criteria task force[J]. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2013, 62(7):649-665. DOI URL