This document represents the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) clinical guidelines to describe best practices in the selection and care of central venous access devices (CVADs) for the infusion of home parenteral nutrition (HPN) admixtures in adult patients. The guidelines targeted adults >18 years of age in which the intervention or exposure had to include HPN that was administered via a CVAD. Case studies, non‐English studies, or studies of CVAD no longer available in the United States were excluded. In total, 564 abstract citations, 350 from Medline and 214 from PubMed/non‐MEDLINE databases, were scanned for relevance. Of the 564 citations, 13 studies addressed at least 1 of the 6 guideline‐related questions, and none of the studies were prospective and randomized. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria were used to adjust the evidence grade based on assessment of the quality of study design and execution. Recommendations for the CVAD type, composition, or number of lumens to minimize infectious or mechanical complications are based on a limited number of studies and expert opinion of the authors, all very experienced in home infusion therapy. No studies were found that compared best solutions for routine flushing of lumens (eg, heparin versus saline) or for maintaining catheters in situ while treating CVAD mechanical or infectious complications. It is clear that studies to answer these questions are very limited, and further research is needed. These clinical guidelines were approved by the ASPEN Board of Directors.

In this study, there were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of catheter-related sepsis or catheter site infections between the standard and antiseptic groups. Future prospective, randomized controlled trials with a larger number of antiseptic catheters are encouraged to confirm or refute these results.

No abstract

More research is needed to address effective interventions to reduce patient and caregiver burdens and to improve outcomes for technology-dependent individuals. A greater level of preparedness for managing home technology and technology-related problems may improve quality of life.