Advertisement

Sequential Pneumatic Compression in the Arm in Neurocritical Patients with a Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheter: A Randomized Trial

  • Alejandro A. RabinsteinEmail author
  • Jodi D. Hellickson
  • Thanila A. Macedo
  • Bradley D. Lewis
  • Jay Mandrekar
  • Robert D. McBaneII
Original Work
  • 72 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) are increasingly used for parenteral access in critically ill hospitalized patients, but they increase the incidence of upper extremity deep venous thrombosis (UE DVT). Sequential compression devices (SCDs) applied to the legs effectively reduce lower extremity DVT, but have not been tested in the arms. Our objective was to determine whether SCDs applied to the arm may reduce the risk of PICC-associated UE DVT.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of randomized, single-center, controlled clinical trial on patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit with critical neurological illness who had a PICC and were not receiving anticoagulants. Between January 2014 and October 2016, patients were randomized 1:1 to an intervention group having a custom SCD applied to the arm harboring the PICC or to a control group. The primary endpoint was ultrasound-detected UE DVT.

Results

Following randomization of 77 subjects, the study was terminated due to excess DVT in the treatment arm. UE DVT was detected in 18 subjects (29.0%), and it was more frequent among those in the SCD group (13/31 [41.9%] vs. the control group 5/31 [16.1%]; p = 0.049). After accounting for crossovers, the difference was still significant (12/28 [43.0%] vs. 6/34 [17.6%]; p = 0.048). Yet, symptomatic UE DVT (n = 3) and pulmonary embolism without evidence of lower extremity DVT (n = 2) were only observed in patients who were not wearing the SCD on the arm.

Conclusions

Although UE DVT is commonly associated with PICC use, the results of this trial do not support the use of SCD on the arm for DVT prevention. Further research on this strategy may nonetheless be justified.

Trial Registration

This trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov under the identifier NCT01670188.

Keywords

Deep venous thrombosis Upper extremity Intermittent pneumatic compression Sequential compression device 

Notes

Author’s Contribution

AAR contributed study design, enrollment of subjects and manuscript preparation. JDH contributed enrollment of subjects and review of the manuscript. JM contributed statistical analysis and review of the manuscript. TAM contributed data collection (ultrasound read) and review of the manuscript. BDL contributed data collection (ultrasound read) and review of the mansucript. RDM contributed review of the manuscript.

Source of Support

Funding was provided by DJO Global.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of Interest

Alejandro A. Rabinstein received support from DJO Global for the conduction of the study (without personal remuneration). Jodi D. Hellickson, Thanila A. Macedo, Bradley D. Lewis, Jay Mandrekar, and Robert D. McBane II declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval/Informed Consent

The study was approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board. All participants were enrolled into the study after they or they surrogate provided written informed consent.

Supplementary material

12028_2019_765_MOESM1_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 19 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Johansson E, Hammarskjold F, Lundberg D, Arnlind MH. Advantages and disadvantages of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) compared to other central venous lines: a systematic review of the literature. Acta Oncol. 2013;52:886–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Horattas MC, Trupiano J, Hopkins S, Pasini D, Martino C, Murty A. Changing concepts in long-term central venous access: catheter selection and cost savings. Am J Infect Control. 2001;29:32–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonizzoli M, Batacchi S, Cianchi G, et al. Peripherally inserted central venous catheters and central venous catheters related thrombosis in post-critical patients. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37:284–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Meyer BM. Developing an alternative workflow model for peripherally inserted central catheter placement. J Infus Nurs. 2012;35:34–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chopra V, Anand S, Hickner A, et al. Risk of venous thromboembolism associated with peripherally inserted central catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet. 2013;382:311–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fallouh N, McGuirk HM, Flanders SA, Chopra V. Peripherally inserted central catheter-associated deep vein thrombosis: a narrative review. Am J Med. 2015;128:722–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fletcher JJ, Stetler W, Wilson TJ. The clinical significance of peripherally inserted central venous catheter-related deep vein thrombosis. Neurocrit Care. 2011;15:454–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nolan ME, Yadav H, Cawcutt KA, Cartin-Ceba R. Complication rates among peripherally inserted central venous catheters and centrally inserted central catheters in the medical intensive care unit. J Crit Care. 2016;31:238–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wilson TJ, Brown DL, Meurer WJ, Stetler WR Jr, Wilkinson DA, Fletcher JJ. Risk factors associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheter-related large vein thrombosis in neurological intensive care patients. Intensive Care Med. 2012;38:272–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Winters JP, Callas PW, Cushman M, Repp AB, Zakai NA. Central venous catheters and upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in medical inpatients: the Medical Inpatients and Thrombosis (MITH) Study. J Thromb Haemost. 2015;13:2155–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Joffe HV, Kucher N, Tapson VF, Goldhaber SZ, Deep Vein Thrombosis FSC. Upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis: a prospective registry of 592 patients. Circulation. 2004;110:1605–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kucher N. Clinical practice. Deep-vein thrombosis of the upper extremities. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:861–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Collaboration CT, Dennis M, Sandercock P, et al. Effectiveness of intermittent pneumatic compression in reduction of risk of deep vein thrombosis in patients who have had a stroke (CLOTS 3): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2013;382:516–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roderick P, Ferris G, Wilson K, et al. Towards evidence-based guidelines for the prevention of venous thromboembolism: systematic reviews of mechanical methods, oral anticoagulation, dextran and regional anaesthesia as thromboprophylaxis. Health Technol Assess. 2005;9:iii–iv, ix–x, 1–78.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lippi G, Favaloro EJ, Cervellin G. Prevention of venous thromboembolism: focus on mechanical prophylaxis. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2011;37:237–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kohro S, Yamakage M, Sato K, Sato JI, Namiki A. Intermittent pneumatic foot compression can activate blood fibrinolysis without changes in blood coagulability and platelet activation. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2005;49:660–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Knight MT, Dawson R. Proceedings: reduction of the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the legs by intermittent compression of the arms. Br J Surg. 1976;63:668.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Trerotola SO, Stavropoulos SW, Mondschein JI, et al. Triple-lumen peripherally inserted central catheter in patients in the critical care unit: prospective evaluation. Radiology. 2010;256:312–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chopra V, Ratz D, Kuhn L, Lopus T, Lee A, Krein S. Peripherally inserted central catheter-related deep vein thrombosis: contemporary patterns and predictors. J Thromb Haemost. 2014;12:847–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chopra V, Kaatz S, Conlon A, et al. The Michigan Risk Score to predict peripherally inserted central catheter-associated thrombosis. J Thromb Haemost. 2017;15:1951–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mermis JD, Strom JC, Greenwood JP, et al. Quality improvement initiative to reduce deep vein thrombosis associated with peripherally inserted central catheters in adults with cystic fibrosis. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2014;11:1404–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Evans RS, Sharp JH, Linford LH, et al. Reduction of peripherally inserted central catheter-associated DVT. Chest. 2013;143:627–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nyquist P, Bautista C, Jichici D, et al. Prophylaxis of venous thrombosis in neurocritical care patients: an evidence-based guideline: a statement for healthcare professionals from the neurocritical care society. Neurocrit Care. 2016;24:47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kirkpatrick A, Rathbun S, Whitsett T, Raskob G. Prevention of central venous catheter-associated thrombosis: a meta-analysis. Am J Med. 2007;120(901):e901–13.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chopra V, Fallouh N, McGuirk H, et al. Patterns, risk factors and treatment associated with PICC-DVT in hospitalized adults: a nested case-control study. Thromb Res. 2015;135:829–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NeurologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Department of NursingMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  4. 4.Department of Health Sciences Research (Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics)Mayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  5. 5.Department of Cardiovascular MedicineMayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations