Background: Short peripheral catheters (SPCs) are used to provide intravenous therapies in hospitalized patients. Recently, the category of SPC has become more complex, with the introduction in clinical practice of "integrated" SPCs (ISPCs), renewed regarding the material (polyurethane rather than polytetrafluoroethylene) and design (large wing; pre-assembled extension; preassembled needle-free connector (NFC)). Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized studies in hospitalized patients, analyzing the risk of overall catheter failure as well as the risk of each type of complication (occlusion, infiltration, thrombophlebitis, and dislodgement) for ISPCs compared to non-integrated SPCs. These systematic review and meta-analysis were registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022322970). Data sources: We searched PUBMED®, EMBASE®, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials register from April to November 2022. Results: included studies: The research identified 1260 articles. After the abstract review, 13 studies were included for full manuscript review and, after that, six papers (4727 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Description of the effect: We found a significantly reduced risk of catheter failure (pooling all complications) for ISPCs compared to SPCs (p = 0.002 RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.63-0.9). A significant reduction in the risks of occlusion (p = 0.007 RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.56-0.92) was observed. As regards the risk of infiltration, thrombophlebitis, and dislodgement, the analysis showed a trend in favor of ISPCs, though not statistically significant (respectively p = 0.2 RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.64-1.1; p = 0.25 RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78-1.07; p = 0.06 RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.52-1.01). Conclusions: ISPCs significantly reduce the risks of catheter failure (overall complications) and occlusion. More RCTs are needed to understand if the preassembled ISPC is better than the composted closed system (non-integrated SPC + extension line + NFC).
Integrated short peripheral intravenous cannulas and risk of catheter failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis / Gidaro, Antonio; Quici, Massimiliano; Giustivi, Davide; Pinelli, Fulvio; Samartin, Federica; Casella, Francesco; Cogliati, Chiara; Rizzi, Giulia; Salvi, Emanuele; Bartoli, Arianna; Foschi, Antonella; Castelli, Roberto; Calloni, Maria; Gemma, Marco. - In: JOURNAL OF VASCULAR ACCESS. - ISSN 1129-7298. - (2024), pp. 1-9. [10.1177/11297298231218468]
Integrated short peripheral intravenous cannulas and risk of catheter failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Castelli, Roberto;
2024-01-01
Abstract
Background: Short peripheral catheters (SPCs) are used to provide intravenous therapies in hospitalized patients. Recently, the category of SPC has become more complex, with the introduction in clinical practice of "integrated" SPCs (ISPCs), renewed regarding the material (polyurethane rather than polytetrafluoroethylene) and design (large wing; pre-assembled extension; preassembled needle-free connector (NFC)). Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized studies in hospitalized patients, analyzing the risk of overall catheter failure as well as the risk of each type of complication (occlusion, infiltration, thrombophlebitis, and dislodgement) for ISPCs compared to non-integrated SPCs. These systematic review and meta-analysis were registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022322970). Data sources: We searched PUBMED®, EMBASE®, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials register from April to November 2022. Results: included studies: The research identified 1260 articles. After the abstract review, 13 studies were included for full manuscript review and, after that, six papers (4727 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Description of the effect: We found a significantly reduced risk of catheter failure (pooling all complications) for ISPCs compared to SPCs (p = 0.002 RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.63-0.9). A significant reduction in the risks of occlusion (p = 0.007 RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.56-0.92) was observed. As regards the risk of infiltration, thrombophlebitis, and dislodgement, the analysis showed a trend in favor of ISPCs, though not statistically significant (respectively p = 0.2 RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.64-1.1; p = 0.25 RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78-1.07; p = 0.06 RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.52-1.01). Conclusions: ISPCs significantly reduce the risks of catheter failure (overall complications) and occlusion. More RCTs are needed to understand if the preassembled ISPC is better than the composted closed system (non-integrated SPC + extension line + NFC).I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
