ArticleRevista Cuidarte
Analysis of complications associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Prospective observational study.
Article in Revista Cuidarte. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inadvertent guidewire retention after radial artery cannulation: report of two cases and safety lessons for vascular access practice.Patient safety in surgery · 2026Article
- Analysis of complications associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Prospective observational study.Revista CuidarteArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Vascular access teams often use guidelines or algorithms to determine the most appropriate vascular access device based on the patient's condition and the substance to be infused. These guidelines are intended to help identify the most qualified personnel for device insertion, but few studies collect information on the performance of these units. Objective: This study aims to identify the evolution and complication rate of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in patients requiring vascular access. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted over three years. Continuous variables with normal distribution were compared using Student's t-test. Nonparametrically distributed variables were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test. For categorical variables, the two-tailed chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used. Regression analysis was performed for the dependent variable of complications. Results: Of the PICCs inserted, 61.99% (566) were in patients receiving oncologic treatment, with a mean dwell time of 136±127.51 days. PICCs inserted in hematologic patients had a mean dwell time of 144±141.3 days (p=0.438). The most frequent complications were accidental removal (3.50%, 32, OR 0.581), thrombosis (3%, 27, OR 0.752), and central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) (2.10%, 19, OR, 0.113). Discussion: Complications related to PICCs were infrequent, with thrombosis being the most prevalent. Accidental removal was also frequent, a complication not thoroughly analyzed in other studies. Conclusions: PICC insertion and management by vascular access teams enables units to achieve a low complication rate in onco-hematological patients.
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.