ArticleNew microbes and new infections2020
Peripherally inserted central catheters: a hidden emerging cause of infection outbreaks.
Article in New microbes and new infections, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Methods to Prevent Bloodstream and Other Infections and Noninfectious Complications Associated With Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026Pooled it
- Lumbar methicillin-resistantWorld journal of clinical cases · 2025Article
- A Case ofCase reports in infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Lower risk of bloodstream infections for peripherally inserted central catheters compared to central venous catheters in critically ill patients.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2022Article
- In Vitro Venous Catheter Material Comparison: Microbial Adhesion in a Thrombotic Blood Flow Model.Journal of infusion nursing : the official publication of the Infusion Nurses SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In our institution, between January 2010 and December 2017, 15 140 peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) were inserted in 12 314 patients. Using time-series analysis to evaluate the annual historical trend (AHT), we observed a significant increase in bloodstream infections (BSIs; AHT = 24; p < 0.001) and associated deaths (AHT = 3; p 0.02) in patient with PICCs. The risk of experiencing a BSI was significantly higher in patients with PICCs (odds ratio = 9.6; 95% confidence interval, 9.08-10.18; p < 0.001). To reduce PICC-related BSIs and their related mortality, it is important to limit the overuse of PICCs and to implement a 'no PICC' policy by limiting the insertion of PICCs to situations without other available options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.