Performance comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in gastrointestinal surgery: A randomized controlled trial

Hiromichi Miyagaki, Kiyokazu Nakajima, Joji Hara, Makoto Yamasaki, Yukinori Kurokawa, Hiroshi Miyata, Shuji Takiguchi, Yoshiyuki Fujiwara, Masaki Mori, Yuichiro Doki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background & aims: Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) are long-term vascular access devices inserted through a peripheral vein of the arm and serve as an alternative to traditional central venous catheters. Currently different types of PICCs are available. No data, however, are available in regard to materials and tip designs. We designed a prospective, randomized trial comparing two major PICCs with different material and tip design: a silicone catheter with distal side slits (Groshong Catheter) and a polyurethane catheter with open-end tip (PI Catheter). Methods: Twenty-six patients who underwent PICCs placement between August 2010 and December 2010 were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was the completion rate of PICC indication. Secondary endpoints were complications rate. Result: The completion rate of PICC indication was not different significantly (81.8% and 92.9%, p=0.5648) and the total complication rate were also not different significantly (9.1% and 14.3%, P=1.0000) between two catheters. In detail, PI Catheter were associated with a significantly higher incidence of catheter occlusion, and Groshong Catheter were associated with a significantly hemorrhages after removal. Conclusion: There was no difference in the durability and the complication between Groshong Catheter and PI Catheter. (UMIN Clinical Trial Registry UMIN000005451).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)48-52
Number of pages5
JournalClinical Nutrition
Volume31
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Central Venous Catheters
Catheters
Randomized Controlled Trials
Peripheral Catheterization
Vascular Access Devices
Polyurethanes
Silicones
Registries
Veins
Clinical Trials
Hemorrhage

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Nutrition and Dietetics
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Performance comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in gastrointestinal surgery : A randomized controlled trial. / Miyagaki, Hiromichi; Nakajima, Kiyokazu; Hara, Joji; Yamasaki, Makoto; Kurokawa, Yukinori; Miyata, Hiroshi; Takiguchi, Shuji; Fujiwara, Yoshiyuki; Mori, Masaki; Doki, Yuichiro.

In: Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 31, No. 1, 01.02.2012, p. 48-52.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Miyagaki, H, Nakajima, K, Hara, J, Yamasaki, M, Kurokawa, Y, Miyata, H, Takiguchi, S, Fujiwara, Y, Mori, M & Doki, Y 2012, 'Performance comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in gastrointestinal surgery: A randomized controlled trial', Clinical Nutrition, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 48-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2011.09.002
Miyagaki, Hiromichi ; Nakajima, Kiyokazu ; Hara, Joji ; Yamasaki, Makoto ; Kurokawa, Yukinori ; Miyata, Hiroshi ; Takiguchi, Shuji ; Fujiwara, Yoshiyuki ; Mori, Masaki ; Doki, Yuichiro. / Performance comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in gastrointestinal surgery : A randomized controlled trial. In: Clinical Nutrition. 2012 ; Vol. 31, No. 1. pp. 48-52.
@article{eeccd06cb58e4759b900f027e3070fc1,
title = "Performance comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in gastrointestinal surgery: A randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "Background & aims: Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) are long-term vascular access devices inserted through a peripheral vein of the arm and serve as an alternative to traditional central venous catheters. Currently different types of PICCs are available. No data, however, are available in regard to materials and tip designs. We designed a prospective, randomized trial comparing two major PICCs with different material and tip design: a silicone catheter with distal side slits (Groshong Catheter) and a polyurethane catheter with open-end tip (PI Catheter). Methods: Twenty-six patients who underwent PICCs placement between August 2010 and December 2010 were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was the completion rate of PICC indication. Secondary endpoints were complications rate. Result: The completion rate of PICC indication was not different significantly (81.8{\%} and 92.9{\%}, p=0.5648) and the total complication rate were also not different significantly (9.1{\%} and 14.3{\%}, P=1.0000) between two catheters. In detail, PI Catheter were associated with a significantly higher incidence of catheter occlusion, and Groshong Catheter were associated with a significantly hemorrhages after removal. Conclusion: There was no difference in the durability and the complication between Groshong Catheter and PI Catheter. (UMIN Clinical Trial Registry UMIN000005451).",
author = "Hiromichi Miyagaki and Kiyokazu Nakajima and Joji Hara and Makoto Yamasaki and Yukinori Kurokawa and Hiroshi Miyata and Shuji Takiguchi and Yoshiyuki Fujiwara and Masaki Mori and Yuichiro Doki",
year = "2012",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.clnu.2011.09.002",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "48--52",
journal = "Clinical Nutrition",
issn = "0261-5614",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Performance comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters in gastrointestinal surgery

T2 - A randomized controlled trial

AU - Miyagaki, Hiromichi

AU - Nakajima, Kiyokazu

AU - Hara, Joji

AU - Yamasaki, Makoto

AU - Kurokawa, Yukinori

AU - Miyata, Hiroshi

AU - Takiguchi, Shuji

AU - Fujiwara, Yoshiyuki

AU - Mori, Masaki

AU - Doki, Yuichiro

PY - 2012/2/1

Y1 - 2012/2/1

N2 - Background & aims: Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) are long-term vascular access devices inserted through a peripheral vein of the arm and serve as an alternative to traditional central venous catheters. Currently different types of PICCs are available. No data, however, are available in regard to materials and tip designs. We designed a prospective, randomized trial comparing two major PICCs with different material and tip design: a silicone catheter with distal side slits (Groshong Catheter) and a polyurethane catheter with open-end tip (PI Catheter). Methods: Twenty-six patients who underwent PICCs placement between August 2010 and December 2010 were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was the completion rate of PICC indication. Secondary endpoints were complications rate. Result: The completion rate of PICC indication was not different significantly (81.8% and 92.9%, p=0.5648) and the total complication rate were also not different significantly (9.1% and 14.3%, P=1.0000) between two catheters. In detail, PI Catheter were associated with a significantly higher incidence of catheter occlusion, and Groshong Catheter were associated with a significantly hemorrhages after removal. Conclusion: There was no difference in the durability and the complication between Groshong Catheter and PI Catheter. (UMIN Clinical Trial Registry UMIN000005451).

AB - Background & aims: Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) are long-term vascular access devices inserted through a peripheral vein of the arm and serve as an alternative to traditional central venous catheters. Currently different types of PICCs are available. No data, however, are available in regard to materials and tip designs. We designed a prospective, randomized trial comparing two major PICCs with different material and tip design: a silicone catheter with distal side slits (Groshong Catheter) and a polyurethane catheter with open-end tip (PI Catheter). Methods: Twenty-six patients who underwent PICCs placement between August 2010 and December 2010 were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was the completion rate of PICC indication. Secondary endpoints were complications rate. Result: The completion rate of PICC indication was not different significantly (81.8% and 92.9%, p=0.5648) and the total complication rate were also not different significantly (9.1% and 14.3%, P=1.0000) between two catheters. In detail, PI Catheter were associated with a significantly higher incidence of catheter occlusion, and Groshong Catheter were associated with a significantly hemorrhages after removal. Conclusion: There was no difference in the durability and the complication between Groshong Catheter and PI Catheter. (UMIN Clinical Trial Registry UMIN000005451).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84856228304&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84856228304&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.clnu.2011.09.002

DO - 10.1016/j.clnu.2011.09.002

M3 - Article

C2 - 21945145

AN - SCOPUS:84856228304

VL - 31

SP - 48

EP - 52

JO - Clinical Nutrition

JF - Clinical Nutrition

SN - 0261-5614

IS - 1

ER -