ライフサイエンスコーパス: PICC

1 PICC placement with fluoroscopic guidance is highly succ

2 PICC pressure versus CICC pressure correlated (r = 0.99)

3 PICC tips were regarded as central if they resided anywh

4 PICCs are associated with a higher risk of deep vein thr

5 PICCs can be used to measure central venous pressure and

6 companies and outside institutions, and 146 PICCs (42%) were managed exclusively at MSKCC.

7 For these 205 PICCs, 131 nurses from 74 home-care companies and instit

8 During the study period, 2574 PICCs were placed in 1807 children.

9 In all, 115 (32.8%) of 351 PICCs were removed as a result of a complication, for a

10 cessitating catheter removal occurred in 534 PICCs (20.8%) during 46 021 catheter-days (11.6 complica

11 entral PICC tip location was achieved in 760 PICCs (90.2%).

12 In a children's hospital, 843 PICCs were placed in 698 patients (age range, 0 days to

13 There were 231 midlines and 97 PICCs inserted into 64 patients (39 male and 25 female;

14 to a previously estimated length by either a PICC nurse or a pediatric interventional radiologist, ac

15 hildren in the PICC group, 158 (15.0%) had a PICC complication that required an emergency department

16 eduction of VTE rates in patients who have a PICC.

17 least 18 years who underwent insertion of a PICC.

18 e ward or intensive care unit who received a PICC for any reason during clinical care in 47 hospitals

19 atients who received a transfusion through a PICC in the left arm were significantly more likely to d

20 ery red blood cell unit transfused through a PICC, there was a significantly increased risk of venous

21 To ascertain awareness of CVCs, whether a PICC or triple-lumen catheter was present was determined

22 In strategy A, all PICC placements were initially attempted at the patient'

23 All PICCs inserted in adult and pediatric patients at Memori

24 All PICCs were placed by a specialized team of PICC nurses a

25 In strategy B, all PICCs were placed by interventional radiologists under f

26 from patients who had an indwelling CICC and PICC concomitantly.

27 IRRs) showed that patients with midlines and PICCs had similar rates of adverse events (IRR 1.18, P=0

28 With the baseline PICC-related deep vein thrombosis rate of 2.7% and poole

29 Bedside PICC placement morbidity can be reduced via US inspectio

30 In patients with cancer, PICCs were rated as appropriate for irritant or vesicant

31 ia a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC).

32 N), peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC), and hospital cost.

33 ugh peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) affects the risk of venous thromboembolism compar

34 Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are a common vascular access device used in clini

35 Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are associated with an increased risk of venous t

36 Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are frequently used to deliver outpatient courses

37 via peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) associated with better delivery of nutrition and

38 of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) at the bedside may result in tip malposition.

39 of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) has grown substantially in recent years.

40 of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs).

41 use peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs).

42 ipherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) are prone to infectious, thrombotic, and mechanic

43 ttent fluoroscopic guidance, a final central PICC tip location was achieved in 760 PICCs (90.2%).

44 ormed a retrospective cohort study comparing PICC and oral therapy for the treatment of acute osteomy

45 In studies comparing PICCs with other CVCs, summary odds ratios (ORs) were ca

46 f insertion and removal argues for continued PICC use in the cancer population.

47 2 test was used to compare initial and final PICC tip locations according to patient age, catheter si

48 Two hundred five PICCs (58%) were managed by home-care companies and outs

49 ncer; 44% infection; 6% other indication for PICC).

50 ethod to develop appropriate indications for PICC use across patient populations.

51 ia US inspection of the ipsilateral neck for PICC tip malposition in the IJ.

52 wever, an optimal catheter to vein ratio for PICC insertion has not previously been investigated to i

53 The size of the vein used for PICC insertion and thus the catheter to vein ratio is th

54 Adult patients waiting for PICC insertion at a large metropolitan teaching hospital

55 h midlines (6.90 per 1000 VAD days) than for PICCs (2.89 per 1000 VAD days).

56 %-61.6%, P < 0.001), a 48-fold difference in PICC lines (aggregate rate: 18.9%, range: 1.7%-81.8%, P

57 Despite reductions in PICC complications, further efforts are needed to preven

58 For peripherally compatible infusions, PICC use was rated as inappropriate when the proposed du

59 f which 723 (85.8%) had a noncentral initial PICC tip position and required additional manipulation.

60 ce required catheter manipulation of initial PICC tip position in 723 cases (85.8%).

61 Access Networks guidelines, and the initial PICC tip location was then determined by means of spot f

62 The decision to insert PICCs should be guided by weighing of the risk of thromb

63 n perceived role: 1) an operator who inserts PICCs; 2) a consultant whose views are not valued by the

64 gy B is more cost-effective for all intended PICC uses.

65 y A is more cost-effective for most intended PICC uses.

66 ed blood cell delivery through a multi-lumen PICC is associated with a greater risk of thrombosis tha

67 ions were administered through a multi-lumen PICC was 1.96 (95% CI 1.47-2.61; p<0.0001) compared with

68 blood cell transfusion through a multi-lumen PICC, 61 had venous thromboembolism.

69 usions were delivered through a single-lumen PICC (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.44-2.14; p=0.95) or central veno

70 urements were taken from 19-gauge dual-lumen PICCs and from 7-Fr, 16-gauge, 18-gauge, and pulmonary a

71 nsfusing red blood cells through multi-lumen PICCs seems necessary.

72 associated with complications necessitating PICC removal.

73 risk factors for complications necessitating PICC removal.

74 bolism compared with transfusion through non-PICC devices.

75 Noncentral PICC tip locations, younger age, and pediatric ICU expos

76 In adjusted analysis, all noncentral PICC tip locations-midline (IRR 4.59, 95% CI, 3.69-5.69)

77 and the association with appropriateness of PICC use in hospitals.

78 Within each scenario, appropriateness of PICC use was compared with that of other venous access d

79 determine the incidence and risk factors of PICC-related complications with a 1-year prospective obs

80 omparison studies, the weighted frequency of PICC-related deep vein thrombosis was highest in patient

81 primary end point was defined as the rate of PICC tip malposition in the ipsilateral IJ as detected b

82 Given the magnitude and seriousness of PICC complications, clinicians should reconsider the pra

83 l PICCs were placed by a specialized team of PICC nurses and interventional radiology technologists i

84 1% (60 of 239) of clinicians were unaware of PICC presence.

85 ificantly more likely to report that <10% of PICCs at their facility were inserted for inappropriate

86 ions for insertion, maintenance, and care of PICCs is thus important for patient safety.

87 ascular access nurses placed the majority of PICCs at their facility, compared to operators (83%) or

88 en perceived role and reported percentage of PICCs placed for inappropriate reasons.

89 uthors' experience with bedside placement of PICCs by an i.v. team and data obtained from the literat

90 ns are frequently unaware of the presence of PICCs and triple-lumen catheters in hospitalized patient

91 teral neck provides immediate recognition of PICCs in aberrant position facilitating catheter reposit

92 ess nurses' perceived role related to use of PICCs and the association with appropriateness of PICC u

93 pect may help ensure more appropriate use of PICCs.

94 teness Method to develop criteria for use of PICCs.

95 Three hundred fifty-one PICCs were inserted during the study period and followed

96 central venous catheters were preferred over PICCs when 14 or fewer days of use were likely.

97 Pediatric PICC placement without fluoroscopic guidance required ca

98 included 843 consecutively placed pediatric PICCs, of which 723 (85.8%) had a noncentral initial PIC

99 tions, further efforts are needed to prevent PICC-associated complications in children.

100 s of PAC-1 or the interacting linker protein PICC-1/CCDC85A-C blocks elongation in embryos with compr

101 ary outcomes included adverse drug reaction, PICC line complication, and a composite of all 3 end poi

102 ibiotics at discharge, whereas 1055 received PICC-administered antibiotics.

103 bolism was calculated for patients receiving PICCs.

104 Analysis by repeated measures showed PICC central venous pressure more than CICC central veno

105 y, patients transfused through a right-sided PICC were more likely to develop deep-vein thrombosis in

106 Moreover, some PICCs may not be placed for clinically valid reasons.

107 intervention procedures included successful PICC repositioning during the initial procedure based on

108 creasing use has led to the realization that PICCs are associated with important complications, inclu

109 PICCs with that related to CVCs showed that PICCs were associated with an increased risk of deep vei

110 Bench work showed that PICCs, because of their longer length and narrower lumen

111 Vein diameter at the PICC insertion site was measured using ultrasound with i

112 in both groups) but slightly greater in the PICC group in across-hospital (risk difference, 1.7% [95

113 Among the children in the PICC group, 158 (15.0%) had a PICC complication that req

114 strategy depends on the intended use of the PICC and the need to have the tip placed at the junction

115 ce to overcome the natural resistance of the PICC.

116 he IR suite, and (c) the intended use of the PICC.

117 As a result, the PICC group had a much higher risk of requiring a return

118 charge administration of antibiotics via the PICC or the oral route.

119 The proportion of children treated via the PICC route varied across hospitals from 0 to 100%.

120 than those treated with antibiotics via the PICC route.

121 rom the CICCs was 11 + 7 mm Hg, and from the PICCs was 12 + 7 mm Hg.

122 A 6-F tapered TL PICC was placed by a bedside nursing-based team with bac

123 The TL PICC design used in this study resulted in unacceptably

124 nography (US) of the veins containing the TL PICC was performed to detect occult venous thrombosis.

125 iews of the literature, scenarios related to PICC use, care, and maintenance were developed according

126 Midlines may be an alternative to PICCs for adult CF patients although further research is

127 eral intravenous catheters were preferred to PICCs for use between 6 and 14 days.

128 the risk of deep vein thrombosis related to PICCs with that related to CVCs showed that PICCs were a

129 eripheral cannulas, parenteral nutrition via PICCs is associated with better nutrient delivery and lo

130 Central venous pressure recorded via PICCs is slightly higher, but the difference is clinical

131 1% (n=209), of which 60.3% (126 of 209) were PICCs.

132 t of the healthcare team are associated with PICC use in hospitals.

133 sk of venous thromboembolism associated with PICCs versus that associated with other CVCs.

134 ith midlines was twice that of patients with PICCs (IRR 2.24, P=0.079, CI 0.91-5.56).

135 resented as per 1000 VAD days, patients with PICCs and midlines had similar rates of adverse events (

136 occur frequently among cancer patients with PICCs, and long-term follow-up is onerous.

137 Unawareness was greatest among patients with PICCs, where 25.1% (60 of 239) of clinicians were unawar

138 eveloped in 482 (5%) of 10 604 patients with PICCs.

139 h midlines per 1000 VAD days than those with PICCs.