Peripherally inserted central catheters versus non-tunnelled ultrasound-guided central venous catheters in newborns: a retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the success rates and other catheter-related parameters between peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and non-tunnelled ultrasound-guided central venous catheters (USG-CVCs) including femoral, jugular, brachiocephalic and subclavian lines. DESIGN: This was a retrospective observational study. SETTING: The study was performed in a level III neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Qatar, as a single-site study. PARTICIPANTS: This study included 1333 neonates who required CVC insertion in the NICU from January 2016 to December 2018. Of those, we had 1264 PICCs and 69 non-tunnelled USG-CVCs. OUTCOME MEASURES: The success rate and other catheter-related complications in the two groups. RESULTS: The overall success rate was 88.4% in the USG-CVCs (61/69) compared with 90% in the PICCs (1137/1264) group (p=0.68). However, the first prick success rate was 69.4% in USG-CVCs (43/69) compared with 63.6% in the PICCs (796/1264) group. Leaking and central line-associated blood stream infection (CLABSI) were significantly higher in the USG-CVC group compared with the PICC group (leaking 16.4% vs 2.3%, p=0.0001) (CLABSI 8.2% vs 3.1%, p=0.03). CLABSI rates in the PICC group were 1.75 per 1000 catheter days in 2016 and 3.3 in 2017 compared with 6.91 in 2016 (p=0.0001) and 14.32 in 2017 (p=0.0001) for the USG-CVCs. USG-CVCs had to be removed due to catheter-related complications in 52.5% of the cases compared with 29.9% in PICCs, p=0.001. In 2018, we did not have any non-tunnelled USG-CVCs insertions in our NICU. CONCLUSIONS: The overall complication rate, CLABSI and leaking are significantly higher in non-tunnelled USG-CVCs compared with the PICCs. However, randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes are desired. Proper central venous device selection and timing, early PICC insertion and early removal approach, dedicated vascular access team development, proper central venous line maintenance, central line simulation workshops and US-guided insertions are crucial elements for patient safety in NICU.

Peripheral intravenous cannulation: complication rates in the neonatal population: a multicenter observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Neonates admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) rely highly on intravenous (IV) therapy, for which the peripheral intravenous cannula (PIVC) is the preferred device to allow such therapies to proceed. Placement of a PIVC is a painful procedure and repeated attempts for successful insertion should therefore be limited. We aimed to quantify the incidence, complications, and factors associated with these complications. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study to examine PIVC-related complications in level III NICUs of two university medical centers (UMC) in The Netherlands. We performed descriptive analyses and binary logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with PIVC complications. RESULTS: A total of 518 catheters were inserted in 235 infants. The first-time success rate was 45%. The predominant reason for non-elective removal due to complications was infiltration (N = 193; 67%). No significant association was found between discipline of the inserter, vein visualization device and location of the PIVC and whether or not a catheter needed to be removed due to a complication. CONCLUSIONS: In this study the majority of PIVCs were removed after the occurrence of a complication. The most common complication was infiltration. Strategies to identify and prevent infiltration in an NICU population are required. Future interventional studies should attempt to improve first-time insertion success and reduce PIVC failure from infiltration in the neonate. Based on the results of the present study, neonatologists and physician assistants are the preferential PIVC inserters. Advanced training of all members of vascular access specialist teams and ongoing monitoring of PIVC-related complications are recommended.

Effect of a vascular access team on central line-associated bloodstream infections in infants admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the effect of a vascular access team on the incidence of central line-associated bloodstream infections in infants admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web-of-Science and the Cochrane Library were searched until December 2013. STUDY SELECTION: Studies that evaluated the implementation of a vascular access team, and focused on the incidence of central line-associated bloodstream infections in infants admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit, were selected. DATA EXTRACTION: Incidence rates of central line-associated bloodstream infections were extracted, as well as information on vascular access team tasks and team composition. The quality of studies was critically appraised using the McMaster tool for quantitative studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven studies involving 136 to 414 participants were included. In general, the implementation of a vascular access team coincided with the implementation of concurrent interventions. All vascular access teams included nurses, and occasionally included physicians. Main tasks included insertion and maintenance of central lines. In all studies, a relative decrease of 45-79% in central line-associated bloodstream infections was reported. CONCLUSIONS: A vascular access team is a promising intervention to decrease central line-associated bloodstream infections in infants admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit. However, level of evidence for effectiveness is low. Future research is required to improve the strength of evidence for vascular access teams.

A literature review on flow-rate variability in neonatal IV therapy.

AIM: To provide an overview of factors influencing the flow rate in intravenous (IV) therapy for newborns. METHODS: We conducted a review of the literature from 1980 to 2011 in PubMed and Web of Knowledge. Articles focusing on flow-rate variability and possible complications due to flow-rate variability were included. RESULTS: Forty-one articles were selected for this review. IV therapy in (preterm) neonates is prone to significant start-up delays and flow-rate variability. The sudden changes in the volume delivered to (preterm) neonates may have serious consequences. Low preprogrammed flow rates, total compliance, and volume of the IV administration set, the presence or absence of antisiphon valves or inline filters and the vertical displacement of syringe pumps all contribute to flow-rate variability in IV therapy for neonates. CONCLUSIONS: Flow-rate variability in IV therapy and its clinical relevance are due to the preprogrammed flow rate, the hydrostatic pressure changes, the complete IV administration set compliance and the type of substances supplied to the patient. To improve IV therapy, the internal compliance of the complete IV administration set should be minimized and the highest possible preprogrammed flow rate should be used in combination with small syringes and low-resistance valves.