Upper Extremity Venous Thrombosis in Patients With Cancer With Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters: A Retrospective Analysis of Risk Factors

Ahn, Daniel H.; Illum, Henrik; Wang, David H.; Sharma, Anant; Dowell, Jonathan E.

doi:10.1200/jop.2012.000595

Cited by 53 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding is attributed to the higher incidence of chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia [13]. Many risk factors for PICC-related thrombosis were analyzed in several studies such as obesity, gender, history of DVTs and use of anticoagulation but none were conclusive and only revealed conflicting results [14][15][16][17]. In our study, only younger age at insertion of PICC was associated with higher risk of thrombosis.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 31%

Venous Thrombosis Associated with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Oncology Patients: A Single Institutional Experience

Kattan¹

2014

J Palliat Care Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) had gradually increased in recent years, especially in cancer patients, as it facilitates blood sampling and treatment administration. Unfortunately, they were associated with a high incidence of complications that limited their widespread use. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the characteristics of oncology patients presenting for complications of their PICC lines and to establish possible associated factors such as age, sex, type of cancer, site of insertion of PICC in our institution. Materials and methods:This retrospective study includes all cancer patients who underwent placement of PICC, from January 2012 till December 2013, under radiology guidance at Hotel-Dieu de France university hospital. All patients were evaluated at enrollment for age, sex, site of PICC insertion, type of neoplasia (solid vs. hematologic malignancy), and followed up for complications for a minimum of two months.Results: During the recruitment period, forty-four patients were enrolled in our study with 54.4% women and 45.6% men. Mean and median age at PICC insertions were 57 and 59 years respectively (standard deviation 16).

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 31%

Venous Thrombosis Associated with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Oncology Patients: A Single Institutional Experience

Kattan¹

2014

J Palliat Care Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Low molecular weight heparin therapy was instituted followed by oral anticoagulation. A study done by Patel GS et al revealed the incidence of venous thrombosis associated with PICCs as 25 % while another study by Ahn DH et al reported venous thrombosis associated with PICC in 15 % of the patients [9,10]. Jumani K et al described the incidence of mechanical complications in 16.4 % of the cases [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: Our Experience from a Cancer Research Centre”

Sundriyal¹,

Shirsi²,

Kapoor

et al. 2014

Indian J Surg Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) is a modern drug delivery system utilised in oncology practice. The purpose of this study was to determine the complications associated with PICCs within a one year study period. PICCs inserted in patients registered at Dharamshila Cancer Hospital and research centre from 1st July 2012 to 30th June 2013 were studied. Data was retrieved from the procedure room records, medical records department, department of radiology and department of microbiology. Data was collected by oncology residents and procedure team. A total of 246 PICCs were inserted during the one year period. Complete data was not available in 23 patients. 223 results were included in the final analysis. USG guidance was required in 14 patients (6.3%). Optimal PICC duration was achieved in 151 patients (67.7%). 28 patient developed culture positive infective complications (12.5%). 44 patients developed mechanical complications (19.7%). Our study shows a relatively higher rate of infective complications. PICC is an acceptable means of drug delivery system.

show abstract

“…It is retrospective in nature with problems of incomplete documentation. Relevant factors that may contribute to PICC‐related AEs, such as the number of lumens, length of hospital stay, comorbidities (i.e., obesity, diabetes, malnourishment, hypercoagulability status), surgery, use of erythropoiesis‐stimulating agents, chemotherapy regimen, and flushing practices, were not collected . The diagnosis of PICC‐associated thrombosis was exclusively clinical, based on symptoms such as lack of compressibility of the veins, edema, and erythema.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters Be Safely Placed in Patients with Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy? A Retrospective Study of Almost 400,000 Catheter-Days

Campagna¹,

Gonella

Berchialla

et al. 2019

The Oncologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are central venous catheters (CVCs) that are commonly used in onco‐hematologic settings for chemotherapy administration. As there is insufficient evidence to recommend a specific CVC for chemotherapy administration, we aimed to ascertain PICC‐related adverse events (AEs) and identify independent predictors of PICC removal in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. Materials and Methods Information on adult patients with cancer with a PICC inserted for chemotherapy administration between September 2007 and December 2014 was extracted from six hospital databases. The primary outcome was PICC removal due to PICC‐related AEs (occlusion, infection, or symptomatic thrombosis). Independent predictors of PICC removal were identified using a multivariate Cox regression model. Results Among the 2,477 included patients, 419 PICC‐related AEs (16.9%; 1.09 AEs per 1,000 PICC‐days) were reported. AEs increased when PICC was inserted at the brachial site (hazard ratio [HR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02–1.84) and with open systems (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.24–2.88) and decreased in older men (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.49–0.81). Conclusion Use of PICC for chemotherapy administration was associated with a low all‐AEs rate. The basilic vein was the safer site, and valved systems had fewer AEs than open systems. More research is needed to explore the interaction between AEs, sex, and age. Implications for Practice These findings provide clinicians with evidence that peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are safe for chemotherapy administration. They also suggest that clinicians should limit the use of open systems when long chemotherapy regimens are scheduled. Moreover, alternatives to PICCs should be considered when administering chemotherapy to young men.

show abstract

Upper Extremity Venous Thrombosis in Patients With Cancer With Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters: A Retrospective Analysis of Risk Factors

Cited by 53 publications

References 28 publications

Venous Thrombosis Associated with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Oncology Patients: A Single Institutional Experience

Venous Thrombosis Associated with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Oncology Patients: A Single Institutional Experience

“Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: Our Experience from a Cancer Research Centre”

Can Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters Be Safely Placed in Patients with Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy? A Retrospective Study of Almost 400,000 Catheter-Days

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About