 |
Journal articles
Subclavian central venous catheter-related thrombosis in trauma patients: incidence, risk factors and influence of polyurethane type.
Abstract : INTRODUCTION: The incidence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) related to a central venous catheter varies considerably in ICUs depending on the population included. The aim of this study was to determine subclavian central venous catheter (SCVC)-related DVT risk factors in severely traumatized patients with regard to two kinds of polyurethane catheters. METHODS: Critically ill trauma patients needing a SCVC for their usual care were prospectively included in an observational study. Depending on the month of inclusion, patients received one of the two available products in the emergency unit: either an aromatic polyurethane SCVC or an aliphatic polyurethane SCVC. Patients were screened weekly by ultrasound for SCVC-related DVT. Potential risk factors were collected, including history-related, trauma-related and SCVC-related characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were included with a median Injury Severity Sore of 30 and a high rate of severe brain injuries (21% of high intracranial pressure). Incidence of SCVC-related DVT was 37% (95% confidence interval: 26 to 40) in patients or 20/1,000 catheter-days. SCVC-related DVT occurred within 8 days in 65% of cases. There was no significant difference in DVT rates between the aromatic polyurethane and aliphatic polyurethane SCVC groups (38% vs. 36%). SCVC-related DVT independent risk factors were age >30 years, intracranial hypertension, massive transfusion (>10 packed red blood cell units), SCVC tip position in the internal jugular or in the innominate vein, and ipsilateral jugular catheter. CONCLUSION: SCVC-related DVT concerned one-third of these severely traumatized patients and was mostly clinically silent. Incidence did not depend on the type of polyurethane but was related to age >30 years, intracranial hypertension or misplacement of the SCVC. Further studies are needed to assess the cost-effectiveness of routine screening in these patients in whom thromboprophylaxis may be hazardous.
Cited literature [40 references]
https://www.hal.inserm.fr/inserm-00850692
Contributor : Ed. Bmc Connect in order to contact the contributor
Submitted on : Thursday, August 8, 2013 - 6:09:17 AM
Last modification on : Friday, October 23, 2020 - 4:59:29 PM
Long-term archiving on: : Saturday, November 9, 2013 - 3:00:11 AM
Contributor : Ed. Bmc Connect in order to contact the contributor
Submitted on : Thursday, August 8, 2013 - 6:09:17 AM
Last modification on : Friday, October 23, 2020 - 4:59:29 PM
Long-term archiving on: : Saturday, November 9, 2013 - 3:00:11 AM