ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Catheter-related complications in AML remission induction chemotherapy: a retrospective comparison of PICCs and CICCs.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCentral venous catheters (CVCs) are a cornerstone for effective supportive therapy in patients with AML undergoing remission induction chemotherapy. While peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are increasingly used as an alternative to centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs), real world data on their implications on AML and supportive therapy remain limited. This study aimed to compare infectious and non-infectious complications of PICCs vs. CICCs in this population.
methodsWe conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of 116 AML patients receiving induction chemotherapy between June 2019 and March 2024. Patients received either a PICC (n = 59) or a CICC (n = 57). Catheter-related complications were analyzed as incidence rates per 1000 catheter days.
resultsPICCs had a longer median dwell time than CICCs (16 vs. 11 days, p = 0.004). Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) rates were low and similar (2.8 vs. 2.6/1000 catheter days, p = 0.93). Exit site infections were significantly lower in the PICC group (7.4 vs. 23.1/1000 catheter days, p = 0.01). Bleeding events occurred more frequently in PICCs (13.9 vs. 6.4/1000 catheter days, p = 0.14) but were mostly minor. More patients in the CICC group received at least one platelet transfusion before insertion (36.8% vs. 16.9%, p = 0.03). Mechanical complications and symptomatic thromboses were rare in both groups.
conclusionPICCs were associated with longer dwell times and fewer local infections, without increased risk of CRBSIs or thrombosis. These findings suggest that PICCs may help optimize supportive care in clinically stable patients undergoing AML induction chemotherapy.
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.