A comparative study of peripherally-inserted and Broviac catheter complications in home parenteral nutrition patients

Changes in Home Parenteral Nutrition Practice Based on the Canadian Home Parenteral Nutrition Patient Registry

“…A recent study 24 demonstrated that PICCs are appropriate for use in HPN for at least 3–4 months, with complication rates comparable to those reported for tunneled central catheters. Another prospective study 25 comparing the rates of complications associated with tunneled catheters (Broviac) and PICC in HPN patients found that overall, complications were similar in both the PICC and the Broviac groups (26 of 71 vs 91 of 133) and that the PICC was associated with a decrease in catheter infection (1.87 vs 1.05 per 1000 catheter‐days; P = .01).…”

American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Guidelines for the Selection and Care of Central Venous Access Devices for Adult Home Parenteral Nutrition Administration

“…In addition to Cotogni et al, 3 other studies compared CLABSI rates in tunneled vs PICC CVADs . Christenson and associates and Bech and associates appeared to analyze the same dataset of Danish HPN patients, and while different questions were asked, similar results were found.…”

“…When comparing polyurethane vs silicone CVADs, Beau and colleagues found no significant difference in catheter CVAD obstruction or thrombosis among patients with short bowel syndrome (SBS). Additionally, Toure et al found no significant difference in the incidence of non‐infectious CVAD complications/1000 patient days in patients with SBS or Crohn's disease receiving HPN via a PICC or tunneled CVAD. The first complication occurred later in patients with a tunneled CVAD; however, this difference was not significant (180.2 ± 154.7 days vs 118.1 ± 129.3 days; P = .09).…”

“…Rationale 1 : No randomized controlled trials were found that addressed this question. Nine observational studies were found that compared CLABSI and types of CVAD . An observational study of severely ill cancer patients compared CLABSI rates in tunneled, implanted, or PICC VADs, and found no significant difference between the groups even though implanted ports had a longer dwell time .…”

Evaluating safety of tunneled small bore central venous catheters in chronic kidney disease population: A quality improvement initiative

“…Details regarding renal function and exact catheter diameters utilized were not provided . In most of these studies, infection rates with tunneled CVCs were found to be higher than with PICCs . Overall, venous thrombosis outcomes with tunneled CVCs were favorable (as compared to PICCs) although detailed analysis of this aspect has not been performed …”