Observational studyPloS one2024
Vascular access devices and associated complications in paediatric critical care: A prospective cohort study.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Low versus high heparin infusion rates for arterial catheters in infants and children in the pediatric intensive care unit.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2026Article
- Article
- Novel Use of Bland Trans-Arterial Embolization for Hepatoblastoma: A Case Report.Pediatric transplantation · 2025Article
- Core Tenets of Central Venous Access in Children.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThough 60-80% of hospitalized patients have an intravascular device placed during hospitalization, there is a substantial risk of complication related to the placement, maintenance and removal of these devices. The objectives of this study were to describe vascular access device use, device complications and lumen dysfunction.
methodsAn observational cohort study was conducted over a 4.5 years period, in two quaternary, university-affiliated paediatric intensive care units (ICU). Eligible patients were admitted to either the paediatric or cardiac ICU and had one or more vascular access devices in-situ at the time of enrolment. Vascular access devices were defined as any external connection directly into the circulation including peripheral and central veins, arteries or bone marrow. Consistent with practice in the studied ICUs removal of peripheral catheters was regarded as due to dysfunction or complication.
results220 patients, 683 devices and 924 lumens were observed. The device complication rate was 21% and the lumen complication rate was 25%. The median duration without complication was 18 days for arterial catheters, 14 days for central venous catheters; 13 days for peripherally inserted central catheters and 4 days for peripheral intravenous catheters. On one third of all patient days, the volume of fluid administered to maintain VADs was equal to or greater than 20% of the total hourly total fluid intake.
conclusionApproximately 1 in 5 vascular devices had one or more complications in ICU, most devices continued to be used without removal, and some complications resolved. The implications of the fluids infused to maintain device function warrants further study, as do strategies to resolve or limit the their complications in children.
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.