Nomogram predicted risk of peripherally inserted central catheter related thrombosis

Hao, Nan; Xie, Xin; Zhou, Zhangjian; Li, Jieqiong; Li, Kang; Wu, Huili; Guo, Pingli; Dang, Chengxue; Zhang, Hao

doi:10.1038/s41598-017-06609-x

Cited by 24 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study confirmed that a high D-dimer level before PICC insertion was related to symptomatic PICC-RT, especially for patients with D dimer level >0.55 mg/L. Hao et al suggested that the D-dimer level could be used as a predictor for future PICC-RT (Hao et al, 2017). A Chinese study also showed that a high D-dimer level may increase the risk of PICC-RT, especially for patients with D-dimer level >5 mg/L (Pan et al, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incidence and risk factors of symptomatic thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central catheter in patients with lung cancer

Chen

Wan

Zhu

2020

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To determine the incidence and risk factors associated with peripherally inserted central catheter‐related thrombosis (PICC‐RT) in patients with lung cancer. Design A retrospective cross‐sectional design. Methods Patients with lung cancer receiving PICC insertion during 1 March 2014‐31 May 2019 at a tertiary hospital in Shanghai, China were enrolled (N = 748). Symptomatic PICC‐RT was confirmed by Doppler ultrasonography in the presence of clinical symptoms and signs. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors of symptomatic PICC‐RT. Results Among the patients (mean age, 60.7 years; males, 67.1%), 55 (7.35%) had symptomatic PICC‐RT. Based on the multivariate analysis, history of smoking [OR 2.49 (1.13–5.46), p < .05], use of Carboplatin [OR 2.23 (1.19–4.17), p < .05] or Docetaxel [OR 7.23 (1.65–31.56), p < .05], PICC size [OR 3.52 (1.78–6.99), p < .001], and level of D‐dimer [OR 5.32 (2.39–11.83), p < .001] were significant risk factors of PICC‐RT. Conclusion Several modifiable factors (e.g., PICC size and level of D‐dimer) were related to PICC‐RT. In the future, prospective studies are warranted to examine whether those factors could increase the risk of PICC‐RT. Meanwhile, healthcare professionals are recommended to perform a comprehensive assessment of the patients receiving PICC insertion. Close attention should be paid to those at risk for PICC‐RT. Impact Identification of risk factors associated with PICC‐RT is an important step towards individualizing the care plan for patients receiving PICC. Our findings provided evidence for the management of PICC‐RT in patients with lung cancer. In clinical practice, nurses could deliver appropriate interventions against modifiable risk factors to reduce the risk of PICC‐RT.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Hao et al . suggested that the D‐dimer level could be used as a predictor for future PICC‐RT (Hao et al., 2017). A Chinese study also showed that a high D‐dimer level may increase the risk of PICC‐RT, especially for patients with D‐dimer level >5 mg/L (Pan et al., 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidence and risk factors of symptomatic thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central catheter in patients with lung cancer

Chen

Wan

Zhu

2020

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several CRT prediction models have been reported but not externally validated (25,26), and they did not give special attention to the cancer status/type. A number of prediction models for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism have been proposed in recent years (16,27,28).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Validation of a New Clinical Prediction Model of Catheter-Related Thrombosis Based on Vascular Ultrasound Diagnosis in Cancer Patients

Liu

Xie

Sun

et al. 2020

Front. Cardiovasc. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Central venous catheters are convenient for drug delivery and improved comfort for cancer patients, but they also cause serious complications. The most common complication is catheter-related thrombosis (CRT). Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for CRT in cancer patients and develop an effective prediction model for CRT in cancer patients. Methods: The development of our prediction model was based on a retrospective cohort (n = 3,131) from the National Cancer Center. Our prediction model was confirmed in a prospective cohort from the National Cancer Center (n = 685) and a retrospective cohort from the Hunan Cancer Hospital (n = 61). The predictive accuracy and discriminative ability were determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and calibration plots. Results: Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sex, cancer type, catheter type, position of the catheter tip, chemotherapy status, and antiplatelet/anticoagulation status at baseline were independent risk factors for CRT. The area under the ROC curve of our prediction model was 0.741 (CI: 0.715-0.766) in the primary cohort and 0.754 (CI: 0.704-0.803) and 0.658 (CI: 0.470-0.845) in validation cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. The model also showed good calibration and clinical impact in the primary and validation cohorts. Liu et al. CRT Prediction Model in Cancer Conclusions: Our model is a novel prediction tool for CRT risk that accurately assigns cancer patients into high-and low-risk groups. Our model will be valuable for clinicians when making decisions regarding thromboprophylaxis.

show abstract

“…There are risk scores for PICC-associated UEVTE, such as the Michigan Risk Score or nomograms derived from retrospective cohorts 34 ; however, these have not been optimized for patients with cancer. 35 The Khorana score on the other hand is used to predict VTE in malignancies 36 ; however, its use in predicting PICC-associated UEVTE in cancer patients is unknown.…”

Section: Assessing Risk For Secondary Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: Current Knowledge and Future Directions

Yuen

Tran

Chunilal

2021

Semin Thromb Hemost

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) has been increasing in incidence due to the escalating use of central venous catheters such as peripherally inserted central catheters. UEDVT can be primary idiopathic or secondary to pacemaker leads, intravascular catheters or cancer. In comparison to conventional venous thromboembolism such as lower limb deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism the risk factors, investigations, and management are not well defined. We review current evidence in primary and secondary UEDVT, highlighting areas in need of further research. We also explore the entity of venous thoracic outlet syndrome, which is said to be a risk factor for recurrent primary UEDVT and is the rationale behind surgical interventions.

show abstract

Nomogram predicted risk of peripherally inserted central catheter related thrombosis

Cited by 24 publications

References 32 publications

Incidence and risk factors of symptomatic thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central catheter in patients with lung cancer

Incidence and risk factors of symptomatic thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central catheter in patients with lung cancer

Development and Validation of a New Clinical Prediction Model of Catheter-Related Thrombosis Based on Vascular Ultrasound Diagnosis in Cancer Patients

Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis: Current Knowledge and Future Directions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About