A retrospective study of central venous catheters GCRI experience

Abstract Background: The use of central venous catheters (CVCs) has greatly improved the quality-of-care in cancer patients, yet these catheters may cause serious infectious and thrombotic complications. The aim of this retrospective study was to study the various types of CVCs and their complicatio...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inIndian journal of medical and paediatric oncology Vol. 34; no. 4; pp. 238 - 241
Main Authors Jain, Sachin A., Shukla, Shilin N., Talati, Shailesh S., Parikh, Sonia K., Bhatt, Shivani J., Maka, Vinayak
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd 01.10.2013
Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Abstract Background: The use of central venous catheters (CVCs) has greatly improved the quality-of-care in cancer patients, yet these catheters may cause serious infectious and thrombotic complications. The aim of this retrospective study was to study the various types of CVCs and their complications. Materials and Methods: We studied retrospectively 213 cases of CVCs in our institute with their indications, type and complications from August 2010 to July 2011. Results: A total of 213 CVCs were inserted in patients with hematological (62%) and solid organ malignancies (38%). Ninety-eight patients (46%) had peripheral inserted central catheter (PICC), 90 (42%) patients had Hickman catheters and 25 (12%) had a port. The median duration of retention of Hickman catheters was 104 days (3-365 days), for the peripherally inserted central catheters was 59 days (3-100 days) and for the port it was 280 days (45-365 days). Non-infective complications were more than infective (12% vs. 7%). The most common complication was non-infective occlusion and thrombophlebitis. In one patient with PICC thrombosis occurred in the cephalic, radial and ulnar vein and in one patient with port thrombosis occurred in the superior vena cava. Organisms were isolated in 60% (12 out of 20) of cultures. Common organisms isolated were Pseudomonas aeruginosa in 5 (42%), Staphylococcus aureus in 2 (16%), Escherichia coli in 2 (16%) and Aspergillus in 3 (25%) patients. 7 out of 12 infected patients had negative blood cultures within 7 days of antibiotic treatment, 5 patients remained positive for more than 7 days with antibiotics. In 155 patients (73%), the desired treatment protocol was completed and at present there are still 28 patients (13%) with catheters. 5 patients (2.3%) died of febrile neutropenia and septicemia with multi-organ failure. In 5 patients (2.3%), the catheters (1 Port, 1 Hickman and 3 PICC) were prematurely removed because of thrombosis. Conclusion: CVCs are better options to facilitate the long-term vascular access provided infection is prevented with meticulous care and treated promptly with proper antibiotics. Most CVCs is acceptable to patients.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0971-5851
0975-2129
DOI:10.4103/0971-5851.125234