Peripherally inserted central catheters: guidance with use of US versus venography in 2,650 patients.

PURPOSE

To compare technical success and initial complication rates of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) by interventional radiologists using ultrasound (US) or venographic guidance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

With use of a computer database, the authors retrospectively reviewed 2,650 procedures, 2,126 of which were performed with US and 524 with venography. Technical success was defined as placement of a PICC. Initial complications were defined as development of a hematoma, inadvertent arterial puncture, or neuropathy. Statistical significance was assessed using the chi2 test.

RESULTS

During 33 consecutive months, 2,650 procedures were performed with a complication rate of 1.0%. The technical success rate was 95.8% for venography and 99.6% for US. The initial complication rate was 0.75% for venography and 1.08% for US. There was no statistically significant difference in immediate complication rates (P = .50); however, there is statistical significance in regard to technical success (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

There is no difference in initial complication rates when comparing US and venographic guidance for PICC insertion. The decision to use either method can be based on clinical grounds and/or physician preference, although US has a higher initial success rate.