Specialist Registrar and PhD Student.
Consultant and Professor, Department of Clinical Sciences Malmö, Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Anaesthesia. 2012 Jan;67(1):65-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06911.x. Epub 2011 Oct 4.
We undertook a review of studies comparing complications of centrally or peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Twelve studies were included. Catheter tip malpositioning (9.3% vs 3.4%, p = 0.0007), thrombophlebitis (78 vs 7.5 per 10,000 indwelling days, p = 0.0001) and catheter dysfunction (78 vs 14 per 10,000 indwelling days, p = 0.04) were more common with peripherally inserted catheters than with central catheter placement, respectively. There was no difference in infection rates. We found that the risks of tip malpositioning, thrombophlebitis and catheter dysfunction favour clinical use of centrally placed catheters instead of peripherally inserted central catheters, and that the two catheter types do not differ with respect to catheter-related infection rates.
我们对比较中心或外周置入中心静脉导管并发症的研究进行了综述。共纳入 12 项研究。与中心置管相比，外周置管分别更容易出现导管尖端位置不良（9.3% vs 3.4%，p = 0.0007）、血栓性静脉炎（78 例/10000 天 vs 7.5 例/10000 天，p = 0.0001）和导管功能障碍（78 例/10000 天 vs 14 例/10000 天，p = 0.04）。感染率无差异。我们发现，尖端位置不良、血栓性静脉炎和导管功能障碍的风险倾向于临床使用中心置管而不是外周置入中心导管，而且两种导管类型在导管相关感染率方面没有差异。
