Scholarlink

Background <p>Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are widely used in oncology but are associated with higher rates of catheter-related thrombosis compared to other central venous access devices. Tunnelled non-cuffed centrally inserted central catheters (tnc-CICC) may offer a safer alternative in patient at high risk of thrombosis.</p> Methods <p>This retrospective cohort study evaluated 193 tnc-CICCs placed in 182 cancer patients at a tertiary oncology unit between January 2021 and December 2022. Primary outcomes is catheter-related thrombosis; secondary outcomes are procedural duration and complication rates. Data were analysed using non-parametric statistical methods.</p> Results <p>The overall thrombosis rate was 1% (0.18 per 1,000 catheter days), significantly lower than reported PICC-associated thrombosis rates. No major intraoperative complications occurred. The overall complication rate was 19.7%, with catheter malfunction (9.3%), migration (5.2%) and bloodstream infections (4.1%) being the most common. Median procedural time was 34&#xa0;min, with no significant difference based on operator experience.</p> Conclusions <p>Off label use of PICCs as tnc-CICCs seems safe and effective. It provides an alternative to PICCs in oncology patients at high risk of thrombosis, even when placed by operators with low experience levels. These findings support the inclusion of tnc-CICCs in vascular access algorithms for cancer patient at high risk of thrombosis and suggest feasibility for nurse-led insertion programs.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Catheter-related thrombosis in cancer patients with tunnelled non-cuffed centrally inserted central catheters: a retrospective cohort study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月4日

查看全文
  • Thomas Douchy,
  • Veerle Boecxstaens,
  • Daphne Hompes,
  • Godelieve Alice Goossens

摘要

Background

Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are widely used in oncology but are associated with higher rates of catheter-related thrombosis compared to other central venous access devices. Tunnelled non-cuffed centrally inserted central catheters (tnc-CICC) may offer a safer alternative in patient at high risk of thrombosis.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study evaluated 193 tnc-CICCs placed in 182 cancer patients at a tertiary oncology unit between January 2021 and December 2022. Primary outcomes is catheter-related thrombosis; secondary outcomes are procedural duration and complication rates. Data were analysed using non-parametric statistical methods.

Results

The overall thrombosis rate was 1% (0.18 per 1,000 catheter days), significantly lower than reported PICC-associated thrombosis rates. No major intraoperative complications occurred. The overall complication rate was 19.7%, with catheter malfunction (9.3%), migration (5.2%) and bloodstream infections (4.1%) being the most common. Median procedural time was 34 min, with no significant difference based on operator experience.

Conclusions

Off label use of PICCs as tnc-CICCs seems safe and effective. It provides an alternative to PICCs in oncology patients at high risk of thrombosis, even when placed by operators with low experience levels. These findings support the inclusion of tnc-CICCs in vascular access algorithms for cancer patient at high risk of thrombosis and suggest feasibility for nurse-led insertion programs.