ArticleCureus2026
Long-Term Use of Non-tunneled Centrally Inserted Central Venous Catheters for Home Parenteral Nutrition in Bedridden Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Tunneled or implanted central venous catheters (CVCs) are recommended for long-term home parenteral nutrition (HPN), but some bedridden patients refuse to undergo surgical insertion. Although recent studies have demonstrated that peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) can be safely maintained for long-term HPN, they may also be impractical owing to patient or provider limitations. Non-tunneled, non-implanted centrally inserted CVCs (CICCs) offer bedside insertion; however, evidence on their long-term safety in home care remains limited. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a single home-visit center in Kyoto, Japan, enrolling patients who received HPN via CICC or PICC between January 2013 and June 2024. Patients with cancer expected to have short-term survival were excluded. The primary outcomes were central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter-related thrombosis (CRT). We calculated incidence rates per 1,000 catheter-days, estimated hazard ratios using Cox proportional hazards analysis, and compared CLABSI-free survival using Kaplan-Meier curves. Results A total of 16 patients (CICC: n=12; PICC: n=4) contributed 2,694 catheter-days of observation. Six CLABSI events occurred (CICC: 4; PICC: 2). The CLABSI incidence rate was 1.79 per 1,000 catheter-days in the CICC group and 4.36 in the PICC group (hazard ratio, 8.65; 95% CI, 0.76-98.8; P=0.082). No CRT events occurred. At six months, CLABSI-free survival was 91.7% for CICCs and 50.0% for PICCs. Conclusions For bedridden patients for whom tunneled or implanted CVCs or PICCs are not feasible, CICCs may represent a potential option for long-term HPN. However, the small sample size, limited number of outcome events, and lack of multivariable adjustment warrant cautious interpretation and further study.
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.