Register for citation alerts

Vascular Access Conversation - IVUPDATE Podcast from IVTEAM

"This study aimed to explore the relationships between risk factors and different venous access device complications in the neonatal setting, and then use that evidence to develop an algorithm based on observational data" van Rens et al (2022).
Vascular access choice in the neonatal setting

Abstract:

Background: Venous access devices (VADs) play a vital role within the neonatal intensive care unit. However, there are significant risks associated with the use of VADs, with complications such as infection, thrombosis, device occlusion, and infiltration/extravasation frequently contributing to device-related failures and increasing the risk of significant patient harm or injury. This study aimed to explore the relationships between risk factors and different venous access device complications in the neonatal setting, and then use that evidence to develop an algorithm based on observational data.

Methods: This is a retrospective, single-center cohort study that was conducted in a large 112-bed neonatal intensive care unit in Qatar. We examined venous access device data from January 2016 to December 2018 for all term and preterm neonates. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the outcomes, which included a mean and its standard deviation or median and an interquartile range for continuous variables regarding normal distribution, and absolute numbers with percentages for discrete variables.

Results: The authors recorded a total of 23,858 VADs inserted during the study period. Of these, 21,313 (89%) were peripheral intravenous catheters, 689 (3%) were extended dwell-peripheral intravenous catheters, 1,335 (6%) were epicutaneo-caval catheters, and 521 (2%) were umbilical venous catheters. In total, 51,179 catheter days were registered, with 2.17 catheter days reported per patient. Peripheral device dwell times were significantly shorter when compared with central venous catheter devices (P < 0.001), with mean dwell times of 22 days ± 23 h and 236 days ± 183 h, respectively. After insertion, a complication occurred in 11,177 (51%) of peripheral VADs and 221 (12%) of central VADs. The type of device inserted , reason/indication for intravenous therapy (P < 0.001, HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.87), and the side of insertion of the device (P < 0.001, HR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.24-1.27) had a significant relationship with outcomes.

Conclusions: Four subgroups of VADs were identified (peripheral intravenous catheters, extended dwell-peripheral intravenous devices, epicutaneo-caval catheters, and umbilical venous catheters) with outcome-related differences. Central venous access devices (epicutaneo-caval catheters and umbilical venous catheters) had lower complications compared with peripheral VADs. Proper venous access device selection, early insertion, and early removal approaches remain crucial to preventing venous access device complications. Peripheral intravenous devices should be used carefully and closely watched for early detection of complications.

Reference:

van Rens MFPT, Bayoumi MAA, van de Hoogen A, Francia ALV, Cabanillas IJ, van Loon FHJ, Spencer TR. The ABBA project (Assess Better Before Access): A retrospective cohort study of neonatal intravascular device outcomes. Front Pediatr. 2022 Nov 3;10:980725. doi: 10.3389/fped.2022.980725. PMID: 36405839; PMCID: PMC9670536.