Salis Ari I, Eclavea Anthony, Johnson Matthew S, Patel Nilesh H, Wong Debie G, Tennery Gerald
Department of Radiology, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004 Mar;15(3):275-81. doi: 10.1097/01.rvi.0000116195.44877.88.
Currently available 4-F and 5-F peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) were investigated to evaluate their possible application for contrast medium injection using power injectors. The study was performed using an in vitro model to demonstrate the feasibility of using PICCs for contrast-enhanced diagnostic studies.
An evaluation of 24 catheter versions consisting of 4-F single-lumen and 5-F dual-lumen PICCs from 13 different manufacturers was conducted. Six of the catheter types were silicone and 18 catheter types were polyurethane. Ten catheters of each type were evaluated with five at full length and five trimmed to 40 cm. With use of a silicone-based simulated SVC model, the catheters were infused with 50 mL of intravenous contrast medium at each flow rate increment. Catheters were tested at increasing flow rates from 0.5 to 5 mL/sec in 0.5-mL/sec increments using a Percupump CT injector. Catheters that failed to rupture were then infused at 1-mL/sec increments at flow rates from 5 to 17 mL/sec using a MedRad Mark V power injector. Tolerated and bursting pressures were recorded as well as the location of the catheter rupture.
Polyurethane catheters ruptured at flow rates between 4 and 15.4 mL/sec, with one catheter not rupturing at the maximal flow rate (17 mL/sec). Silicone catheters ruptured at flow rates between 0.5 to 3.5 mL/sec. Average rupture locations by type and length were at the extension leg/hub connection area on five of the PICCs, on the extension legs on 21 of the PICCs, on the catheter/hub connection on four PICCs, and on the proximal catheter on 16 of the PICCs.
The low burst rates at which all silicone catheters ruptured suggest that those catheters are not able to withstand typical flow rates used for CT arteriography. Conversely, although there is a wide range of discrepancy in the polyurethane catheter burst pressures, many polyurethane catheters can tolerate relatively high flow rates without rupture. This suggests that they may be safely used for CT arteriography with appropriate precautions and protocols in place.
对目前可用的4F和5F外周静脉穿刺中心静脉导管(PICC)进行研究,以评估其使用动力注射器注射造影剂的可能性。本研究采用体外模型来证明使用PICC进行增强造影诊断研究的可行性。
对来自13个不同制造商的24种导管型号进行了评估,包括4F单腔和5F双腔PICC。其中6种导管类型为硅胶材质,18种导管类型为聚氨酯材质。每种类型的导管取10根进行评估,5根为全长,5根修剪至40 cm。使用基于硅胶的模拟上腔静脉模型,在每次流速增加时向导管内注入50 mL静脉造影剂。使用Percupump CT注射器以0.5 mL/秒的增量将流速从0.5增加到5 mL/秒对导管进行测试。对于未破裂的导管,然后使用MedRad Mark V动力注射器以1 mL/秒的增量将流速从5增加到17 mL/秒进行注入。记录耐受压力和破裂压力以及导管破裂的位置。
聚氨酯导管在流速4至15.4 mL/秒之间破裂,有一根导管在最大流速(17 mL/秒)时未破裂。硅胶导管在流速0.5至3.5 mL/秒之间破裂。按类型和长度划分的平均破裂位置,在5根PICC的延长管/接头连接区域,在21根PICC的延长管上,在4根PICC的导管/接头上,以及在16根PICC的近端导管上。
所有硅胶导管破裂时的低爆破率表明这些导管无法承受CT血管造影术所用的典型流速。相反,尽管聚氨酯导管的爆破压力存在很大差异,但许多聚氨酯导管能够耐受相对较高的流速而不破裂。这表明在采取适当的预防措施和方案后,它们可安全用于CT血管造影术。