venous access

静脉通路
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:对于需要频繁但间歇性的单采患者,血管通路可以证明具有挑战性。我们描述了使用涡流LP双腔端口的迁移(血管动力学,莱瑟姆,纽约)到一个Powerflow和一个ClearVUE电源可注射端口(BectonDickinson,富兰克林湖,NJ)在一系列接受间歇性单采术的患者中。
    方法:所有患者都需要长期间歇性单采。八个具有双腔涡流端口(预),并更换为一个Powerflow端口和一个具有90°针入口的常规皮下静脉端口(后),而12个没有任何端口并接受相同的配置。获得IRB批准。我们记录了治疗时间,流量,和组织纤溶酶原激活剂(tPA)放置后使用五个疗程。如果可用,我们将5种治疗方法与Vortex端口和新配置进行了比较。
    结果:采用新配置后,平均治疗时间缩短(P=0.0033)。预测的平均治疗时间,调整性别,种族,BMI和年龄以及患者内部的相关性为91.18分钟前和77.96分钟后。新配置的流速更高(P<0.0001)。涡流端口的预测平均流速(mL/min)为61.59,新配置为71.89。与研究中的所有其他配置相比,从涡流端口转换的人群中消除了tPA的使用,并且减少了48%。
    结论:采用新的装置配置的静脉通路端口用于间歇性单采导致更高的流速和更少的总治疗时间。tPA的使用大大减少。这些结果表明,新配置可以减少医院的费用,并在繁忙的电泳实践中提高吞吐量。临床试验注册与ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT04846374。
    OBJECTIVE: In patients with a need for frequent but intermittent apheresis, vascular access can prove challenging. We describe the migration of the use of a Vortex LP dual lumen port (Angiodynamics, Latham, NY) to one Powerflow and one ClearVUE power injectable port (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, NJ) in a series of patients undergoing intermittent apheresis.
    METHODS: All patients had a need for long-term intermittent apheresis. Eight had double lumen Vortex port (pre) and were exchanged for one Powerflow port and one conventional subcutaneous venous port with 90° needle entry (post) while 12 did not have any port in place and received the same configuration. IRB approval was granted. We recorded the treatment time, flow rate, and tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) use for five treatment sessions after placement. When available, we compared five treatments with the Vortex port and the new configuration.
    RESULTS: The mean treatment time is reduced with the new configuration (P = 0.0033). The predicted mean treatment time, adjusting for gender, race, BMI and age and accounting for correlations within a patient is 91.18 min pre and 77.96 min post. The flow rate is higher with the new configuration (P < 0.0001). The predicted mean flow rate in mL/min is 61.59 for the Vortex port and 71.89 for the new configuration. tPA use was eliminated in the population converted from Vortex ports and had a 48% reduction when compared to all other configurations in the study.
    CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a novel device configuration of venous access ports for intermittent apheresis resulted in higher flow rates and less total time for treatment. Use of tPA was greatly reduced. These results suggest that the new configuration could result in less expense for the hospital and better throughput in a busy pheresis practice. Clinical trial registration with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04846374.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:右心导管插入术(RHC)是一种常见的诊断工具,在肺动脉高压(PH)的诊断中特别重要。直到今天,还没有明确的说明或指南关于静脉通路的偏好。
    目的:本荟萃分析评估了选择性RHC的静脉通路部位的选择是否对手术或临床结果有影响。
    方法:进行结构化文献检索。单组报告和报告事件数据的对照试验符合资格。主要终点是通路相关和总体并发症的复合。
    结果:包括6,509例RHC程序在内的19项研究合格。对两组结果进行分析。第一组将中心静脉通路(CVA;n=2,072)与外周静脉通路(PVA;n=2,680)进行比较,仅包括多臂研究(n=12,C/P比较)。在第二组中,对所有研究(n=19,三方比较)进行了评估,以比较三种单独的访问方式。总并发症发生率为1.0%(n=68)。在C/P比较中,PVA的主要终点发生率明显低于CVA(0.1%vs.1.2%;p=0.004)。在三方面比较中,PVA的并发症发生率明显低于股骨入路(0.3%vs.1.1%;p=0.04)。颈静脉入路的并发症发生率最高(2.0%),但与外周(0.3%;p=0.29)或股骨入路(1.1%;p=0.32)相比,差异不显着。
    结论:这项荟萃分析显示,PVA用于RHC的并发症发生率明显低于CVA。确定性水平低,异质性高。该汇总数据分析表明PVA是RHC的主要静脉通路。
    OBJECTIVE: Right heart catheterization (RHC) is a common diagnostic tool and of special importance in the diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension (PH). Until today, there have been no clear instructions or guidelines on which venous access to prefer. This meta-analysis assessed whether the choice of the venous access site for elective RHC has an impact on procedural or clinical outcomes.
    METHODS: A structured literature search was performed. Single-arm reports and controlled trials reporting event data were eligible. The primary endpoint was a composite of access-related and overall complications.
    RESULTS: Nineteen studies, including 6509 RHC procedures, were eligible. The results were analyzed in two groups. The first group compared central venous access (CVA; n = 2072) with peripheral venous access (PVA; n = 2680) and included only multi-arm studies (n = 12, C/P comparison). In the second group, all studies (n = 19, threeway comparison) were assessed to compare the three individual access ways. The overall complication rate was low at 1.0% (n = 68). The primary endpoint in the C/P comparison occurred significantly less for PVA than for CVA (0.1% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.004). In the threeway comparison, PVA had a significantly lower complication rate than femoral access (0.3% vs. 1.1%; p = 0.04). Jugular access had the numerically highest complication rate (2.0%), but the difference was not significant compared to peripheral (0.3%; p = 0.29) or femoral access (1.1%; p = 0.32).
    CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed that PVA for RHC has a significantly lower complication rate than CVA. There was a low level of certainty and high heterogeneity. This pooled data analysis indicated PVA as the primary venous access for RHC.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:外周插入的中央导管(PICC)和新型的手臂端口,PICC端口,目前用于乳腺癌患者的新辅助化疗治疗。我们旨在比较接受这两种设备之一的患者的生活质量(QoL)调查总体满意度,心理影响,以及对专业人士的影响,社会和体育活动,当地的不适。
    方法:我们对PICC端口和PICC端口进行了前瞻性观察前后研究。纳入新辅助化疗的成年(年龄≥18岁)女性乳腺癌患者。主要结果是根据植入装置12个月后评估的生活质量评估静脉装置导管(QLAVD)问卷的QoL。
    结果:在2019年5月至2020年11月之间,对278名个人进行了资格筛选,210人报名。PICC端口优于PICC,QLAVD评分分别为29[25;32]和31[26;36.5](p=0.014)。具体来说,大多数QLAVD结构与心理影响有关,社会方面,不适倾向于PICC端口与PICC,尤其是60岁以下的女性。总的来说,插入时和治疗期间的疼痛评分两组之间没有显着差异,以及感染,继发性错位,血栓形成,或设备的阻塞。
    结论:在接受新辅助化疗的乳腺癌患者中,在QoL方面,PICC端口总体上比PICC更好地接受,尤其是那些年轻的人。器械相关并发症相似。
    BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and new type of arm-port, the PICC-port, are currently used for neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment in patients with breast cancer. We aimed to compare Quality of Life (QoL) of patients receiving one of these two devices investigating overall satisfaction, psychological impact, as well as the impact on professional, social and sport activities, and local discomfort.
    METHODS: We did a prospective observational before-after study of PICCs versus PICC-ports. Adult (aged ≥ 18 years) females with breast cancer candidate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy were included. The primary outcome was QoL according to the Quality-of-Life Assessment Venous Device Catheters (QLAVD) questionnaire assessed 12 months after device implantation.
    RESULTS: Between May 2019 and November 2020, of 278 individuals screened for eligibility, 210 were enrolled. PICC-ports were preferred over PICCs with a QLAVD score of 29 [25; 32] vs 31 [26; 36.5] (p = 0.014). Specifically, most QLAVD constructs related to psychological impact, social aspects, and discomfort were in favor of PICC-ports vs PICC, especially in women under the age of 60. Overall, pain scores at insertion and during therapy administration were not significantly different between the two groups, as well as infection, secondary malpositioning, thrombosis, or obstruction of the device.
    CONCLUSIONS: In women with breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy, PICC-ports were overall better accepted than PICCs in terms of QoL, especially in those who were younger. Device-related complications were similar.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在儿科患者中,目前,静脉接入装置的选择取决于操作者的经验和偏好,以及当地对特定资源和技术的可用性。不过,考虑到与成人相比,儿童静脉通路的选择有限,这样的临床选择具有重要的相关性,最好基于现有的最佳证据.尽管在过去的5年中已经发布了一些算法,他们似乎没有完全令人满意和有用的临床实践。因此,GAVePed是意大利最重要的静脉通路小组的儿科兴趣小组,GAVeCeLT-已经就儿童静脉接入设备的选择达成了全国共识。在对现有证据进行系统审查后,共识小组(包括在该领域具有书面能力的意大利专家)提供了结构化建议,回答了关于在紧急情况下和选修情况下选择静脉通路的10个关键问题,住院和非住院儿童。最终建议中只包括达成完全一致的声明。所有建议也被构造为一个简单的视觉算法,以便于转化为临床实践。
    In pediatric patients, the choice of the venous access device currently relies upon the operator\'s experience and preference and on the local availability of specific resources and technologies. Though, considering the limited options for venous access in children if compared to adults, such clinical choice has a great critical relevance and should preferably be based on the best available evidence. Though some algorithms have been published over the last 5 years, none of them seems fully satisfactory and useful in clinical practice. Thus, the GAVePed-which is the pediatric interest group of the most important Italian group on venous access, GAVeCeLT-has developed a national consensus about the choice of the venous access device in children. After a systematic review of the available evidence, the panel of the consensus (which included Italian experts with documented competence in this area) has provided structured recommendations answering 10 key questions regarding the choice of venous access both in emergency and in elective situations, both in the hospitalized and in the non-hospitalized child. Only statements reaching a complete agreement were included in the final recommendations. All recommendations were also structured as a simple visual algorithm, so as to be easily translated into clinical practice.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:建立外周静脉通路对儿科住院医师来说是一个挑战,对新生儿来说是一个痛苦的过程。我们评估了在儿科居民进行的外周静脉导管插入过程中红色发光二极管透射电镜的疗效。
    方法:患者按当前体重(≤1,500g,>1,500g)并随机分配到透照组或对照组。前三次尝试是由儿科住院医师进行的,随后是新生儿学家的三次尝试。主要结果是第一次尝试成功。次要比较包括住院医师和新生儿科医师的成功插入时间和总体成功率。
    结果:共分析了559例手术。在≤1,500g的地层中,居民首次尝试的成功率为44/93(47%),而不进行透照的成功率为44/90(49%)(p=0.88),在地层中进行透照的成功率为103/188(55%),在地层中进行透照的成功率为64/188(34%)。1,500g(p<0.001)。居民的总体成功率在透照中为86%,而在地层中在对照组中为73%。1,500g(p=0.003),但在≤1,500g的地层中没有差异(78/93[84%]与72/90[80%],p=0.57)。当居民的经验水平超过6个月时,没有影响。新生儿学家的总体成功率和成功插管时间在两个体重阶层中没有显着差异。
    结论:瞬态照明可提高儿科住院医师在新生儿中进行外周静脉置管的首次尝试成功率>1,500g,而在≤1,500g的婴儿中没有发现益处。
    BACKGROUND: Establishing peripheral vein access is challenging for pediatric residents and a painful procedure for neonates. We assessed the efficacy of a red light-emitting diode transilluminator during peripheral vein catheter insertion performed by pediatric residents.
    METHODS: Patients were stratified by current weight (≤1,500 g, >1,500 g) and randomized to the transillumination or the control group. The first three attempts were performed by pediatric residents, followed by three attempts by a neonatologist. The primary outcome was success at first attempt. Secondary comparisons included time to successful insertion and overall success rates of residents and neonatologists.
    RESULTS: A total of 559 procedures were analyzed. The success rate at resident\'s first attempt was 44/93 (47%) with transillumination versus 44/90 (49%) without transillumination (p = 0.88) in the strata ≤1,500 g and 103/188 (55%) with transillumination versus 64/188 (34%) without transillumination in the strata >1,500 g (p < 0.001). The overall success rate for residents was 86% in the transillumination versus 73% in the control group in the strata >1,500 g (p = 0.003) but not different in the strata ≤1,500 g (78/93 [84%] vs. 72/90 [80%], p = 0.57). There was no effect when the experience level of residents exceeded 6 months. Neonatologists\' overall success rate and time to successful cannulation did not differ significantly in both weight strata.
    CONCLUSIONS: Transillumination improves the first-attempt success rate of peripheral vein cannulation performed by pediatric residents in neonates >1,500 g, while no benefit was found in infants ≤1,500 g.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目标:在跨radial时代,右心导管插入术(RHC)的手臂静脉通路正在上升。程序成功受许多因素的影响,包括锁骨下/无名静脉狭窄(SVS)和预先存在的导线或导管。在同一作者先前发表的一项研究中,2%的病例通过手臂进行RHC不成功,主要是由于SVS。自从这项研究以来,已经开发了提高RHC成功率的技术,包括用冠状动脉导丝穿过狭窄,接着是气球扩张。我们旨在确定锁骨下/无名静脉成形术是否可以成功治疗SVS患者的RHC。
    方法:我们的回顾性研究包括在2019年11月1日至2022年12月31日之间从手臂接受RHC的患者,由于无法通过导管穿过SVS,然后做了气囊静脉成形术.然后评估完成的RHC的成功率。
    结果:在2506个通过手臂进入的RHC中,2488只使用导管或在导丝上成功。在18名患者中,导管通过导丝需要进行静脉成形术.后扩张,所有18例(100%)均成功进行RHC,平均手术时间为35.2分钟(SD=15.5分钟).13例(72.2%)患者中最常见的狭窄部位是锁骨下静脉,12例患者(66.7%)存在起搏器/植入式心律转复除颤器导线。
    结论:球囊扩张SVS是提高手臂RHC成功率的有效方法。这是一种安全的技术,可以防止交叉到不同的访问站点,从而提高患者满意度并减少替代部位并发症的可能性。
    OBJECTIVE: In the trans-radial era, arm venous access for right heart catheterization (RHC) is rising. Procedural success is affected by many factors, including subclavian/innominate vein stenosis (SVS) and pre-existing wires or catheters. In a study published previously by the same authors, 2% of cases had unsuccessful RHC through the arm, predominantly due to SVS. Since that study, techniques to improve RHC success rates have been developed, including crossing the stenosis with a coronary guidewire, followed by balloon dilatation. We aimed to determine whether subclavian/innominate venoplasty allows successful RHC in patients with SVS.
    METHODS: Our retrospective study included patients who had RHC from the arm between November 1, 2019, and December 31, 2022 that was unsuccessful due to the inability to pass a catheter through the SVS, and then underwent balloon venoplasty. The success rate of completed RHC was then assessed.
    RESULTS: Out of 2506 RHCs via arm access, 2488 were successful with a catheter alone or over a guidewire. In 18 patients, venoplasty was needed for catheter passage over a guidewire. Post-dilatation, all 18 cases (100%) had successful RHC with a mean procedural time of 35.2 (SD = 15.5) minutes. The most common stenosis site was the subclavian vein in 13 patients (72.2%), and 12 patients (66.7%) had pacemaker/ implantable cardioverter defibrillator wires present.
    CONCLUSIONS: Balloon dilatation of SVS is an efficacious method to improve the success rate of RHC from the arm. It is a safe technique that may prevent cross-over to a different access site, thereby improving patient satisfaction and reducing the possibility of alternate site complications.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:用于静脉-静脉(VV)体外膜氧合(ECMO)支持的双腔插管通常插入右颈内静脉(RIJV),然而,有些情况下可能会使这种静脉路径无法进入。此多中心病例系列旨在评估在无法进入RIJV的患者中使用替代静脉通路进行单部位插管是否安全可行。
    方法:我们进行了一项多机构回顾性分析,包括在双腔插管(DLC)(定义为每年>10DLC)方面有丰富经验的高容量ECMO中心。三个中心((弗莱堡(德国),多伦多(加拿大)和维也纳(奥地利)同意分享他们的数据,包括基线特征,技术ECMO和插管数据以及与ECMO插管和结果相关的并发症。
    结果:共有20例患者接受了呼吸衰竭的替代DLC。套管插入部位包括左颈内静脉(n=5),右(n=7)或左(n=3)锁骨下静脉和右(n=4)或左(n=1)股静脉。套管尺寸的中位数为26(19-28)法国。初始目标ECMO流量中位数为2.9(1.8-3.1)L/min,与使用的套管大小和估计的心输出量相对应。插管期间未报告手术并发症,ECMO运行时间中位数为15(9-22)天。10例患者成功桥接肺移植(n=5)或肺恢复(n=5)。10名患者在ECMO支持期间或之后死亡。
    结论:单部位双腔导管的替代静脉通路是一种安全可行的选择,可以为无法进入RIJV的患者提供VV-ECMO支持。
    OBJECTIVE: Dual-lumen cannulas for veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support are typically inserted in the right internal jugular vein (RIJV); however, some scenarios can make this venous route inaccessible. This multicentre case series aims to evaluate if single-site cannulation using an alternative venous access is safe and feasible in patients with an inaccessible RIJV.
    METHODS: We performed a multi-institutional retrospective analysis including high-volume ECMO centres with substantial experience in dual-lumen cannulation (DLC) (defined as >10 DLC per year). Three centres [Freiburg (Germany), Toronto (Canada) and Vienna (Austria)] agreed to share their data, including baseline characteristics, technical ECMO and cannulation data as well as complications related to ECMO cannulation and outcome.
    RESULTS: A total of 20 patients received alternative DLC for respiratory failure. Cannula insertion sites included the left internal jugular vein (n = 5), the right (n = 7) or left (n = 3) subclavian vein and the right (n = 4) or left (n = 1) femoral vein. The median cannula size was 26 (19-28) French. The median initial target ECMO flow was 2.9 (1.8-3.1) l/min and corresponded with used cannula size and estimated cardiac output. No procedural complications were reported during cannulation and median ECMO runtime was 15 (9-22) days. Ten patients were successfully bridged to lung transplantation (n = 5) or lung recovery (n = 5). Ten patients died during or after ECMO support.
    CONCLUSIONS: Alternative venous access sites for single-site dual-lumen catheters are a safe and feasible option to provide veno-venous ECMO support to patients with inaccessible RIJV.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:在危重患者中获得血管通路至关重要。EZ-IO®设备易于使用,具有很高的插入成功率。因此,骨内血管通路(IOVA)的使用逐渐增加.
    目的:我们的目的是确定如何在院外心脏骤停(OHCA)复苏期间将IOVA整合到血管通路管理中。
    方法:分析2013年1月1日至2021年3月15日之间发生的事件的OHCA法国注册数据,我们研究:人口统计学,发生和管理的情况,包括血管通路,延迟和进化。主要结果是IOVA植入率。
    结果:在注册表中包含的7156OHCA中,我们分析了3964名(55%)接受心肺复苏的患者.3122例(79%)血管通路为外周,骨内775例(20%),中央12例(<1%)。在研究的33个连续三个月中,IOVA的使用线性增加(R2=0.61),占2013年所有血管通路的7%和2021年的33%(p=0.001)。在创伤性心脏骤停中明显更频繁:12%对5%;p<0.0001。第一次肾上腺素推注明显晚于IOVA组,在6(4-10)对5(3-8)分钟;p<0.0001。IOVA组的生存率明显降低,1%对7%;p<0.0001。
    结论:在研究期间,IOVA的插入率显着增加,达到管理OHCA患者所有血管通路的30%。在院前心脏骤停的管理过程中,骨内途径在静脉通路策略中的位置尚未确定。
    BACKGROUND: Obtaining vascular access is crucial in critically ill patients. The EZ-IO® device is easy to use and has a high insertion success rate. Therefore, the use of intraosseous vascular access (IOVA) has gradually increased.
    OBJECTIVE: We aim to determine how IOVA was integrated into management of vascular access during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) resuscitation.
    METHODS: Analysing the data from the OHCA French registry for events occurring between 1 January 2013 and 15 March 2021, we studied: demography, circumstances of occurrence and management including vascular access, delays and evolution. The primary outcome was the rate of IOVA implantation.
    RESULTS: Among the 7156 OHCA included in the registry, we analysed the 3964 (55%) who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The vascular access was peripheral in 3122 (79%) cases, intraosseous in 775 (20%) cases and central in 12 (<1%) cases. The use of IOVA has increased linearly (R2  = 0.61) during the 33 successive trimesters studied representing 7% of all vascular access in 2013 and 33% in 2021 (p = 0.001). It was significantly more frequent in traumatic cardiac arrest: 12% versus 5%; p < 0.0001. The first epinephrine bolus occurred significantly later in the IOVA group, at 6 (4-10) versus 5 (3-8) min; p < 0.0001. Survival rate in the IOVA group was significantly lower, at 1% versus 7%; p < 0.0001.
    CONCLUSIONS: The insertion rate of IOVA significantly increased over the studied period, to reach 30% of all vascular access in the management OHCA patients. The place of the intraosseous route in the strategy of venous access during the management of prehospital cardiac arrest has yet to be determined.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:中线相关血流感染是肠衰竭儿童和使用肠外营养(PN)的动物研究中的主要问题。在接受PN的新生仔猪中,我们比较了脓毒症,线闭塞,线路替换,死亡率,以及使用和不使用4%-乙二胺四乙酸四钠(T-EDTA)锁定溶液的成本。
    方法:我们对参加14天独家PN(TPN)试验或7天短肠综合征(SBS)试验的仔猪进行了回顾性审查,开始T-EDTA之前和之后。每天用1-ml溶液锁线2小时(T-EDTATPN,n=17;T-EDTASBS,n=48),并与我们以前使用每天两次1.5毫升肝素冲洗的护理标准进行比较(CONTPN,n=34;CONSBS,n=48)。每天两次检查线路通畅和败血症的体征。尽可能更换颈静脉导管用于闭塞。人道终点用于对抗生素治疗无反应的脓毒症或未解决的导管闭塞。
    结果:与CON相比,使用T-EDTA减少脓毒症,TPN显着(P=0.006),SBS仔猪有趋势(P=0.059)。在TPN研究中,需要线路改变的线路闭塞减少了15%(P=0.16),T-EDTASBS仔猪未发生线闭塞。
    结论:在我们的新生仔猪研究中,使用T-EDTA锁定溶液减少脓毒症,虽然没有统计学意义,减少需要换行的闭塞。考虑到动物研究的费用,添加锁定解决方案必须具有成本效益,我们能够证明T-EDTA显著降低了总研究成本并改善了动物福利。
    BACKGROUND: Central line-associated bloodstream infections are a major concern for children with intestinal failure and in animal research using parenteral nutrition (PN). In neonatal piglets receiving PN, we compared sepsis, line occlusions, line replacements, mortality, and costs with and without the use of a 4%-tetrasodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (T-EDTA) locking solution.
    METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of piglets with a central venous jugular catheter enrolled in 14-day exclusive PN (TPN) trials or in 7-day short bowel syndrome (SBS) trials, before and after initiation of T-EDTA. Lines were locked with a 1-ml solution for 2 h daily (T-EDTATPN, n = 17; T-EDTASBS, n = 48) and compared with our prior standard of care using 1.5-ml heparin flushes twice daily (CONTPN, n = 34; CONSBS, n = 48). Line patency and signs of sepsis were checked twice daily. Jugular catheters were replaced for occlusions whenever possible. Humane end points were used for sepsis not responding to antibiotic treatment or unresolved catheter occlusions.
    RESULTS: Compared with CON, sepsis was reduced using T-EDTA, significantly for TPN (P = 0.006) and with a trend for SBS piglets (P = 0.059). Line occlusions necessitating line changes were reduced 15% in TPN studies (P = 0.16), and no line occlusions occurred for T-EDTA SBS piglets.
    CONCLUSIONS: In our neonatal piglet research, use of T-EDTA locking solution decreased sepsis and, although not statistically significant, reduced occlusions requiring line replacements. Given the expense of animal research, adding a locking solution must be cost-effective, and we were able to show that T-EDTA significantly reduced total research costs and improved animal welfare.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号