2022
DOI: 10.1177/11297298221085450
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Midline peripheral catheters inserted in the superficial femoral vein at mid-thigh: Wise choice in COVID-19 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients with helmet continuous positive airway pressure

Abstract: Background: During coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Helmet Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (h-CPAP) has been widely used to treat Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure (AHRF). In COVID-19 patients undergoing h-CPAP a simple short peripheral catheter could be insufficient. According to the European Recommendations for Proper Indication and Use of Peripheral venous access consensus, a stable peripheral Vascular Access Device is indicated for intravenous treatment compatible with the peripheral rou… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This evolution improved the approach through the common femoral vein (CFV) and offered the possibility of moving the exit site away from the inguinal crease by tunneling the catheter at the mid-thigh. 3 At the same time, US guided venipuncture allowed to approach the superficial femoral vein (SFV) at mid-thigh, as recently reported by Annetta et al 4 and Gidaro et al 5 During COVID 19 pandemic, the femoral approach was recommended and widely used due to the distance from the patient's airways, the lower risk of dislocation than CICCs during pronation manoeuvres and the absence of interaction with the CPAP helmet, often used in the treatment of COVID 19 pneumonia. [5][6][7][8] Since 2020, Nurses of an Italian tertiary hospital Vascular Access Team (VAT), started using femoral approach in CVAD positioning as alternative to PICCs, when the veins of the arm were unavailable and a CICC was not indicated or the intraprocedural risks of CICC positioning were too high.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…This evolution improved the approach through the common femoral vein (CFV) and offered the possibility of moving the exit site away from the inguinal crease by tunneling the catheter at the mid-thigh. 3 At the same time, US guided venipuncture allowed to approach the superficial femoral vein (SFV) at mid-thigh, as recently reported by Annetta et al 4 and Gidaro et al 5 During COVID 19 pandemic, the femoral approach was recommended and widely used due to the distance from the patient's airways, the lower risk of dislocation than CICCs during pronation manoeuvres and the absence of interaction with the CPAP helmet, often used in the treatment of COVID 19 pneumonia. [5][6][7][8] Since 2020, Nurses of an Italian tertiary hospital Vascular Access Team (VAT), started using femoral approach in CVAD positioning as alternative to PICCs, when the veins of the arm were unavailable and a CICC was not indicated or the intraprocedural risks of CICC positioning were too high.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…In the in vitro model we chose a high load of bacterial contamination, in order to reproduce the worst clinical settings. The use of femoral catheters, mainly with mid-thigh exit site, is becoming increasingly common in hospitals, particularly in bedridden patients with psychomotor agitation, delirium, and dementia [21][22]. These patients are, among others, those at greater risk of bacterial skin colonization; indeed, many of them live in nursing homes, have had several hospital admissions and undergo bed hygiene [21].…”
Section: N Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 27 Despite the lack of available data on this phenomenon, there is a consensus on avoiding the use of armpit straps in the presence of peripherally inserted venous catheters. 11 Recently the implantation of midline catheters in the superficial femoral vein has been proposed as a possible solution with promising results, 28 however additional data is needed to confirm these findings.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%