Dataset Information

Comparison of Management for Central Venous Stenosis With or Without Previous Catheter Placement.

ABSTRACT: Objective: To compare central venous stenosis/occlusion with or without previous jugular catheter placement history. Methods: Data of patients with central vein stenosis/occlusion receiving endovascular intervention in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2018 were collected and analyzed. Results: Twenty-nine patients with previous jugular catheter placement history (CVC group) and 33 patients (excluded two with technical failure) without such history (non-CVC group) are included in this study. Previous jugular catheter placement history raised the risk of postintervention recurrence 1.02 times (CVC group vs. non-CVC group, HR = 2.02 95%CI: 0.91-4.48). The primary patency rate at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months was 76.9, 54.2, 45.5, and 25.0% separately in the CVC group and 80.6, 70.0, 67.9, and 44.4% separately in the non-CVC group. The assisted primary patency rate at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months was 92.3, 91.7, 86.4, and 68.8% separately in the CVC group and 93.5, 90.0, 82.1, and 61.1% separately in the non-CVC group. Patients in the CVC group received a higher frequency of reintervention (0.7 times/year/patient vs. 0.3 times/year/patient). There was no significant difference in the assisted primary patency rate between the two groups. Different primary interventions (angioplasty alone, bare metal stent, stent graft) did not affect primary patency and assisted primary patency, but percutaneous transluminal stenting (PTS) with a bare metal stent had a significant lower primary patency rate between 3 and 24 months compared with PTS with a stent graft (p = 0.011). Conclusion: Central venous stenosis/occlusion with a previous jugular catheter placement history develops symptoms earlier and had a worse prognosis after endovascular intervention. More efforts are needed to carry out end-stage kidney disease life plan to reduce the harm of evitable catheter placement.

SUBMITTER: Ma W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8490807 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Central venous catheter placement is a common procedure with a high incidence of error. Other fields requiring high reliability have used Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) to prioritize quality and safety improvement efforts. OBJECTIVE: To use FMEA in the development of a formal, standardized curriculum for central venous catheter training. METHODS: We surveyed interns regarding their prior experience with central venous catheter placement. A multidisciplinary team used FMEA to identify high-priority failure modes and to develop online and hands-on training modules to decrease the frequency, diminish the severity, and improve the early detection of these failure modes. We required new interns to complete the modules and tracked their progress using multiple assessments. RESULTS: Survey results showed new interns had little prior experience with central venous catheter placement. Using FMEA, we created a curriculum that focused on planning and execution skills and identified 3 priority topics: (1) retained guidewires, which led to training on handling catheters and guidewires; (2) improved needle access, which prompted the development of an ultrasound training module; and (3) catheter-associated bloodstream infections, which were addressed through training on maximum sterile barriers. Each module included assessments that measured progress toward recognition and avoidance of common failure modes. Since introducing this curriculum, the number of retained guidewires has fallen more than 4-fold. Rates of catheter-associated infections have not yet declined, and it will take time before ultrasound training will have a measurable effect. CONCLUSION: The FMEA provided a process for curriculum development. Precise definitions of failure modes for retained guidewires facilitated development of a curriculum that contributed to a dramatic decrease in the frequency of this complication. Although infections and access complications have not yet declined, failure mode identification, curriculum development, and monitored implementation show substantial promise for improving patient safety during placement of central venous catheters.

Project description:Critically ill patients often undergo central venous catheter placement during thrombocytopenia and/or coagulopathy. It is unclear whether severe coagulopathy increases the risk of postprocedural bleeding in critically ill patients with severe thrombocytopenia.DesignSingle-center retrospective cohort study.SettingAcademic mixed ICU in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.PatientsConsecutive severely thrombocytopenic (platelet count ≤ 50 × 109/L) patients who underwent central venous catheter placement between February 2016 and February 2020.InterventionsCentral venous catheter placement in patients with both severe thrombocytopenia and severe coagulopathy (international normalized ratio > 1.5 and/or activated partial thromboplastin time > 45 s) versus patients with severe thrombocytopenia and normal or mildly prolonged international normalized ratio and activated partial thromboplastin time.Measurements and main resultsWe included 289 central venous catheter placements in 175 patients, 112 in patients with and 172 in patients without severe coagulopathy. Median (interquartile range) platelet count was 27 (16-38) and equal for both groups. There were 44 bleeding episodes at the central venous catheter insertion site (15.5%), of which four (1.4%) were grade 2 and two (0.7%) were grade 3. There were 19 bleeding episodes (17.0%) versus 25 bleeding episodes (14.5%) in the coagulopathy and noncoagulopathy groups, of which one and five were of grade 2 or higher, respectively. After correction for confounders, coagulopathy had no effect on bleeding: odds ratio (95% CI) 0.96 (0.24-3.88). Before central venous catheter placement, 116 (40.8%) patients received platelet transfusion. Bleeding at the central venous catheter insertion site occurred in 19 of 116 patients (16.4%) and 25 of 168 patients (14.9%) who did and did not receive platelet transfusion. After correction for confounders, platelet transfusion had no effect on bleeding: odds ratio (95% CI) 0.73 (0.18-2.83).ConclusionsCoagulopathy was not associated with an increased bleeding risk in severely thrombocytopenic ICU patients undergoing ultrasound guided central venous catheter placement. Prophylactic platelet transfusion in patients with severe thrombocytopenia was not associated with a reduced risk of bleeding.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Management for Central Venous Stenosis With or Without Previous Catheter Placement.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets