Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Intensive Care
Published in: Annals of Intensive Care 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Central Venous Catheter | Research

A clinical evaluation of two central venous catheter stabilization systems

Authors: Tarja J. Karpanen, Anna L. Casey, Tony Whitehouse, Jean-Francois Timsit, Olivier Mimoz, Mercedes Palomar, Tom S. J. Elliott

Published in: Annals of Intensive Care | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Central venous catheters (CVCs) are commonly secured with sutures which are associated with microbial colonization and infection. We report a comparison of a suture-free system with standard sutures for securing short-term CVC in an international multicentre, prospective, randomized, non-blinded, observational feasibility study. Consented critical care patients who had a CVC inserted as part of their clinical management were randomized to receive either sutures or the suture-free system to secure their CVC. The main outcome measures were CVC migration (daily measurement of catheter movement) and unplanned catheter removals.

Results

The per cent of unplanned CVC removal in the two study groups was 2% (suture group 2 out of 86 patients) and 6% (suture-free group 5 out of 85 patients). Both securement methods were well tolerated in terms of skin irritation. The time and ease of application and removal of either securement systems were not rated significantly different. There was also no significant difference in CVC migration between the two securement systems in exploratory univariate and multivariate analyses. Overall, 42% (36 out of 86) of the CVC secured with sutures and 56% (48 out of 85) of the CVC secured with the suture-free securement system had CVC migration of ≥ 2 mm.

Conclusions

The two securement systems performed similarly in terms of CVC migration and unplanned removal of CVC; however, the feasibility study was not powered to detect statistically significant differences in these two parameters.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ISRCTN13939744. Registered 9 July 2015, http://​www.​isrctn.​com/​ISRCTN13939744.
Literature
1.
2.
Bodenham A, Babu S, Bennett J, et al. AAGBI: safer vascular access guidelines 2016. Anaesthesia. 2016;71:573–85.CrossRef
3.
Marschall J, Mermel LA, Fakih M, et al. Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. Strategies to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections in acute care hospitals: 2014 update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2014;35(7):753–71.CrossRef
4.
Gorski L, Hadaway L, Hagle ME, McGoldrick M, Orr M, Doellman D. Infusion therapy standards of practice. J Infus Nurs. 2016;39(Supplement):1S.
5.
Karpanen TJ, Casey AL, Whitehouse T, Nightingale P, Das I, Elliott TS. Clinical evaluation of a chlorhexidine intravascular catheter gel dressing on short-term central venous catheters. Am J Infect Control. 2016;44(1):54–60.CrossRef
6.
Yamamoto AJ, Solomon JA, Soulen MC, et al. Sutureless securement device reduces complications of peripherally inserted central venous catheters. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2002;13(1):77–81.CrossRef
7.
Rickard CM, Edwards M, Spooner AJ, et al. A 4-arm randomized controlled pilot trial of innovative solutions for jugular central venous access device securement in 221 cardiac surgical patients. J Crit Care. 2016;36:35–42.CrossRef
8.
Ullman AJ, Cooke ML, Mitchell M, et al. Dressings and securement devices for central venous catheters (CVC). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;10(9):CD010367.
9.
10.
Frasca D, Dahyot-Fizelier C, Mimoz O. Prevention of central venous catheter-related infection in the intensive care unit. Crit Care. 2010;14(2):212.CrossRef
11.
Loveday HP, Wilson JA, Prieto J, Wilcox MH. epic3: revised recommendation for intravenous catheter and catheter site care. J Hosp Infect. 2016;92(4):346–8.CrossRef
12.
Loveday HP, Wilson JA, Pratt RJ, et al. epic3: national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS Hospitals in England. J Hosp Infect. 2014;86(Supplement 1):S1–70.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A clinical evaluation of two central venous catheter stabilization systems
Authors
Tarja J. Karpanen
Anna L. Casey
Tony Whitehouse
Jean-Francois Timsit
Olivier Mimoz
Mercedes Palomar
Tom S. J. Elliott
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 2110-5820
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-019-0519-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Annals of Intensive Care 1/2019 Go to the issue

Review

Serum biomarkers of delirium in the elderly: a narrative review

Correction

Correction to: Factors associated with acute kidney injury in acute respiratory distress syndrome

Research

Diaphragm thickening in cardiac surgery: a perioperative prospective ultrasound study

Review

Management of severe asthma exacerbation: guidelines from the Société Française de Médecine d’Urgence, the Société de Réanimation de Langue Française and the French Group for Pediatric Intensive Care and Emergencies

Letter to the Editor

Response to the letter to the Editor “Comparing video and direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in the general ward” by Shao and Colleagues

Research

Chest CT scan and alveolar procollagen III to predict lung fibroproliferation in acute respiratory distress syndrome