Search

Intracavitary electrocardiography (IC-ECG) is a non-invasive method for intraprocedural tip location during central venous catheterization. Over the last 20 years, the IC-ECG method has been thoroughly investigated and many studies have confirmed its wide applicability and feasibility, as well as its great accuracy and safety in different populations of patients and in different types of central venous access devices (CVADs). This retrospective study presents a two-center experience with tip location of central venous catheters using IC-ECG, by means of a new wireless portable device. Tip location was performed during 983 insertions of CVADs at bedside, using this new device. Clinical conditions with limited or no applicability of IC-ECG were excluded. The feasibility of IC-ECG, as performed using the novel device, was 92.2%. This wireless device may play an important role in central venous catheterization at bedside, since it is pocket-sized, particularly easy to use, and easy to sanify after use., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Central venous access devices are essential for the management of critically ill patients, but they are potentially associated with many complications, which may occur during or after insertion. Many evidence-based documents-consensus and guidelines-suggest practical recommendations for reducing catheter-related complications, but they have some limitations. Some documents are not focused on critically ill patients; other documents address only some special strategies, such as the use of ultrasound; other documents are biased by obsolete concepts, inappropriate terminology, and lack of considerations for new technologies and new methods. Thus, the Italian Group of Venous Access Devices (GAVeCeLT) has decided to offer an updated compendium of the main strategies-old and new-that should be adopted for minimizing catheter-related complications in the adult critically ill patient. The project has been planned as a consensus, rather than a guideline, since many issues in this field are relatively recent, and few high-quality randomized clinical studies are currently available, particularly in the area of indications and choice of the device. Panelists were chosen between the Italian vascular access experts who had published papers on peer-reviewed journals about this topic in the last few years. The consensus process was carried out according to the RAND/University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methodology, a modification of the Delphi method, that is, a structured process for collecting knowledge from groups of experts through a series of questionnaires. The final document has been structured as statements which answer to four major sets of questions regarding central venous access in the critically ill: (1) before insertion (seven questions), (2) during insertion (eight questions), (3) after insertion (three questions), and (4) at removal (three questions)., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Central venous catheterization may be required in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) for parenteral nutrition, antibiotic treatment, or blood sampling. Different venous access devices can be taken into consideration-centrally inserted central catheters (CICC), peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC), and femorally inserted central catheters (FICCs)-depending on the clinical conditions of the patients. Regardless of the type of access, the presence of paraplegia or tetraplegia is commonly considered a risk factor for catheter-related thrombosis (CRT)., Method: This retrospective study analyzes the rate of CRT and other non-infectious complications associated with central venous access in a cohort of 115 patients with paraplegia or tetraplegia, most of them affected by ALS ( n  = 109)., Results: In a period of 34 months, from January 2021 to October 2023, we inserted 75 FICCs, 29 CICCs, and 11 PICCs. PICCs were inserted only in patients with preserved motility of the upper limbs. All devices were inserted by trained operators adopting appropriate insertion bundles. We had no immediate or early complication. Though antithrombotic prophylaxis was adopted only in 61.7% of patients, we had no symptomatic CRT. Other non-infectious complications were infrequent (4 out of 115 patients)., Conclusion: These results suggest (a) that the presence of paraplegia or tetraplegia is not necessarily associated with an increased risk of CRT, (b) that the adoption of well-designed insertion bundles plays a key role in minimizing non-infectious complications, and (c) that the insertion of FICCs by direct cannulation of the superficial femoral vein at mid-thigh in paraplegic/tetraplegic patients may have the same advantages which have been described in the general population., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

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., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Femoral ports are used in patients with indication to a totally implanted venous access device but with contraindication to chest-ports and brachial ports because of obstruction of the superior vena cava. In the last three decades, femoral ports have been implanted almost exclusively by cannulation of the common femoral vein at the groin, while the position of the tip has been assessed by X-ray., Methods: We report our experience with a new approach to femoral ports, which includes recent methods and techniques developed in the last few years. These novel femoral ports, which we call "FICC-ports," are characterized by (a) long femoral 5 Fr polyurethane catheter inserted by ultrasound-guided puncture of the superficial femoral vein at mid-thigh; (b) intraprocedural location of the tip in the sub-diaphragmatic inferior vena cava, using ultrasound visualization by the transhepatic and/or the subcostal view; (c) low-profile or very low-profile reservoir implanted above the quadriceps muscle, at mid-thigh., Results: In the last 3 years, we have implanted 47 FICC-ports in young adults with mediastinal lymphoma compressing the superior vena cava. We had no immediate/early complication, and only three late complications (one kinking of the catheter in the subcutaneous tissue; one tip migration with secondary venous thrombosis; one persistent withdrawal occlusion due to fibroblastic sleeve)., Conclusion: If there is indication to a femoral port, the implantation of a "FICC-port"-as described above-is to be strongly considered in terms of safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness: no immediate-early complications, minimal late complications, no X-ray exposure, low invasiveness, low cost., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: PICC-ports may be defined as totally implantable central venous devices inserted in the upper limb using the current state-of-the-art techniques of PICC insertion (ultrasound-guided venipuncture of deep veins of the arm, micro-puncture kits, proper location of the tip preferably by intracavitary ECG), with placement of the reservoir at the middle third of the arm. A previous report on breast cancer patients demonstrated the safety and efficacy of these devices, with a very low failure rate., Methods: This retrospective multicenter cohort study-developed by GAVeCeLT (the Italian Group of Long-Term Venous Access Devices)-investigated the outcomes of PICC-ports in a large cohort of unselected patients. The study included 4480 adult patients who underwent PICC-port insertion in five Italian centers, during a period of 60 months. The primary outcome was device failure, defined as any serious adverse event (SAE) requiring removal. The secondary outcome was the incidence of temporary adverse events (TAE) not requiring removal., Results: The median follow-up was 15.5 months. Device failure occurred in 52 cases (1.2%), the main causes being local infection ( n  = 7; 0.16%) and CRBSI ( n  = 19; 0.42%). Symptomatic catheter-related thrombosis occurred in 93 cases (2.1%), but removal was required only in one case (0.02%). Early/immediate and late TAE occurred in 904 cases (20.2%) and in 176 cases (3.9%), respectively., Conclusions: PICC-ports are safe venous access devices that should be considered as an alternative option to traditional arm-ports and chest-ports when planning chemotherapy or other long-term intermittent intravenous treatments.