No abstract

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence in children has sharply increased with the majority of cases secondary to central venous catheters (CVCs). Among CVCs, the number of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) placed has risen significantly. In this multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study, we enrolled patients aged 6 months to 18 years with newly placed PICCs or tunneled lines (TLs). We evaluated the incidence of VTE, central line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), and catheter malfunctions in PICCs and TLs, and risk factors of CVC-related VTE. A total of 1967 CVCs were included in the analysis. The incidence of CVC-related VTE was 5.9% ± 0.63%. The majority of the cases, 80%, were in subjects with PICCs, which had a significantly higher risk of catheter-related VTE than subjects with TLs (hazard ratio [HR] = 8.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-23; P < .001). PICCs were significantly more likely to have a CLABSI (HR = 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.2; P = .002) and CVC malfunction (HR = 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6-2.4; P < .001). Increased risk of CVC-related VTE was found in patients with a prior history of VTE (HR = 23; 95% CI, 4-127; P < .001), multilumen CVC (HR = 3.9; 95% CI, 1.8-8.9; P = .003), and leukemia (HR = 3.5; 95% CI, 1.3-9.0; P = .031). Children with PICCs had a significantly higher incidence of catheter-related VTE, CLABSI, and CVC malfunction over TLs. The results suggest that pause be taken prior to placing CVCs, especially PICCs, due to the serious complications they have been shown to cause.

No abstract

No abstract

To create a risk model for hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism in critically ill children upon admission to an ICU. DESIGN:Case-control study. SETTING:ICUs from eight children's hospitals throughout the United States. SUBJECTS:Critically ill children with hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (cases) 0-21 years old and similar children without hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (controls) from January 2012 to December 2016. Children with a recent cardiac surgery, asymptomatic venous thromboembolism, or a venous thromboembolism diagnosed before ICU admission were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:The multi-institutional Children's Hospital-Acquired Thrombosis registry was used to identify cases and controls. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism and putative risk factors present at or within 24 hours of ICU admission to develop the final model. A total of 548 hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism cases (median age, 0.8 yr; interquartile range, 0.1-10.2) and 187 controls (median age, 2.4 yr; interquartile range, 0.2-8.3) were analyzed. In the multivariable model, recent central venous catheter placement (odds ratio, 4.4; 95% CI, 2.7-7.1), immobility (odds ratio 3.6, 95% CI, 2.1-6.2), congenital heart disease (odds ratio 2.9, 95% CI, 1.7-4.7), length of hospital stay prior to ICU admission greater than or equal to 3 days (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.6), and history of autoimmune/inflammatory condition or current infection (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.2-3.4) were each independently associated with hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism. The risk model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73-0.84). CONCLUSIONS:Using the multicenter Children's Hospital-Acquired Thrombosis registry, we identified five independent risk factors for hospitalacquired venous thromboembolism in critically ill children, deriving a new hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism risk assessment model. A prospective validation study is underway to define a high-risk group for risk-stratified interventional trials investigating the efficacy and safety of prophylactic anticoagulation in critically ill children.

Background Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a known complication among pediatric and adult cancer patients. Adolescent and young adult oncology (AYAO) patients have unique biological and physiological characteristics that make them distinct from other populations. Our objective was to study the VTE incidence, risk factors, and outcomes, which have been understudied in this population. Procedure A retrospective case–control study was conducted on AYAO participants with new or relapsed cancer and an imaging confirmed VTE from January 2011 to November 2016 at our institution. Eligible AYAO participants without a history of VTE were designated as controls and were randomly selected from our institution's tumor registry. Demographics, medical history, surgeries, central venous catheter (CVC) data, VTE diagnosis and treatment, relapses, and deaths were abstracted. Results Thirty‐five VTE cases and 70 controls were included in this analysis. Eighty percent of cases had leukemia or lymphoma (vs. a solid tumor) compared to 58% of controls. The majority of VTEs (57%) were CVC associated, and more than 70% of cases had more than one CVC placed during their cancer treatment versus 34% of controls. Infection was associated with increased VTE risk (OR = 6.35, 95% CI = 2.30, 17.55, p < .0001). VTE cases had increased cancer relapse (23% vs. 10%) and mortality rates (29% vs. 16%) than controls. Conclusion AYAO participants with a VTE were more likely to have leukemia or lymphoma, more than one CVC or infection. Further studies are needed to identify patients who would benefit from modifiable prevention measures, such as limiting to one CVC, preventing infections, or considering prophylactic anticoagulation for those with a liquid tumor.

Background Risk assessment models (RAMs) have been developed to identify children at high risk of hospital‐acquired venous thromboembolism (HA‐VTE). None have been externally validated nor compared. Objectives The objective was to compare performance of these RAMs by externally validating them using the Children's Hospital‐Acquired Thrombosis (CHAT) Registry, ie, a multicenter database of children with radiographic‐confirmed HA‐VTE and corresponding controls. Patients/Methods Risk assessment models were included if the full logistic regression equation was available and all RAM variables were collected in the CHAT Registry. A random sample of 200 cases and 200 controls was selected. The performance of the RAMs was assessed for discrimination using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC), and calibration using plots, slopes, and intercepts, and the Hosmer‐Lemeshow test. Results Three RAMs were included. Each had excellent discrimination with AUROC ≥ 0.85. However, calibration was generally poor, with calibration slopes significantly different from 1 (0.71, P < .001; 1.44, P = .002; 0.68, P < .001), intercepts significantly different from 0 (−1.64, P < .001; −0.62, P < .001; 0.78, P < .001), and Hosmer‐Lemeshow test P < .001 for each. Exceptions included the Arlikar et al and Atchison et al RAMs for pediatric HA‐VTE in non‐intensive care unit (ICU) patients and ICU patients, respectively, despite derivation from ICU and non‐ICU patients, respectively. In these subpopulations, both showed excellent discrimination and good calibration. Conclusion Given the lack of adequate calibration for evaluated RAMs, further investigation and refinement of RAMs for pediatric HA‐VTE is needed prior to application of a RAM in a clinical setting or risk‐stratified clinical trial of primary thromboprophylaxis against HA‐VTE in children.

Background: Appropriate timing of central venous catheter (CVC) removal, in relation to start of anticoagulation, in children after the diagnosis of a CVC-related thrombosis (CRT) is not well established. Objectives: This retrospective cohort study evaluated the incidence of symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE) after CVC removal using data from the multi-institutional Children's Hospital-Acquired Thrombosis (CHAT) Consortium Registry. Patients/Methods: The CHAT Registry consists of data from children aged 0-21 years with a hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism. Eligible subjects were those with CRT diagnosed <3 days after CVC removal. Subjects were excluded if the CRT was due to a failed CVC insertion. Subjects were divided into three groups: those with CVC removal without anticoagulation, those with CVC removal <48 h after starting anticoagulation, and those with CVC removal ≥48 h after starting anticoagulation.