The value of selection of appropriate catheter to vein ratio to prevent development of complication of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central venous catheter in patients at intensive care unit / 中国中西医结合急救杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective To analyze the relationship between the catheter to vein ratio and the formation of peripheral insertion of central venous catheter (PICC) related upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (PICC-UEDVT) in cases having undergone PICC in patients at intensive care unit (ICU) and further identify the best optimal ratio cut-off point to reduce the incidence of PICC-UEDVT.Methods A retrospective study was conducted, including 69 patients having undergone PICC with complete clinical data admitted to the Department of Critical Care Medicine of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from August 2013 to December 2016; their ages were > 18 years old and catheter indwelling times were > 1 week; the patients' basic information, disease related laboratory parameters and catheter insertion situation were collected. According to the occurrence of PICC-UEDVT, they were divided into PICC-UEDVT group and non PICC-UEDVT group; the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the catheter to vein ratio versus the incidence ofPICC-UEDVT was plotted to assess the optimal ratio to reduce the incidence of PICC-UEDVT.Results In the 69 patients, there were 7 patients in the PICC-UEDVT group and 62 patients in the non PICC-UEDVT group, the incidence of PICC-UEDVT being 10.14%. Four, 5 and 6 French (Fr) catheters were indwelled in 43, 23 and 3 cases respectively, and the range of catheter to vein ratio was 20% - 67%. The comparisons between PICC-UEDVT group and non PICC-UEDVT group in various aspects were as follows the incidence of DVT in the PICC-UEDVT group was significantly higher than that in non PICC-UEDVT group [42.9% (3/7) vs. 6.5% (4/62)], the rate of using vasopressor drugs [57.14% (4/7) vs. 17.74% (11/62)], D-dimer level [mg/L 9.0 (3.0, 12.3) vs. 1.8 (1.0, 3.6)], patients of indwelling 5Fr catheter [71.4% (5/7) vs. 29.0% (18/62)] and the percentage of patientsapplying catheter to vein ratio 45%-67% [57.14% (4/7) vs. 17.74% (11/62)] in PICC-UEDVT group were all higher than those in the non PICC-UEDVT group, the differences being statistically significant (allP < 0.05). ROC analysis showed that the catheter to vein ratio 44% was the optimal cut off or critical point, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) at that point was 0.755, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = 0.554-0.955, sensitivity = 71.4% and specificity = 79.0%; compared with the patients using 45%-67% catheter to vein ratio, the incidence of PICC-UEDVT was 6.182 times higher than those using the ratio 20%-44% [odds ratio (OR) = 6.182, 95%CI = 1.208-31.634,P = 0.036]; however, there was no significant difference in incidence of PICC-UEDVT between 20%-32% and 33%-44% (P = 1.000).Conclusion It is found that the 44% catheter to vein ratio was the optimal critical point to reduce the incidence of PICC-UEDVT, possessing relatively high sensitivity and specificity; applying <44% catheter to vein ratio can decrease the risk of PICC-UEDVT occurrence in patients at ICU.