Gidaro Antonio, Quici Massimiliano, Giustivi Davide, Pinelli Fulvio, Samartin Federica, Casella Francesco, Cogliati Chiara, Rizzi Giulia, Salvi Emanuele, Bartoli Arianna, Foschi Antonella, Castelli Roberto, Calloni Maria, Gemma Marco
Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences "Luigi Sacco," University of Milan, Luigi Sacco Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Emergency Department ASST Lodi, Lodi, Italy.
J Vasc Access. 2025 Mar;26(2):372-380. doi: 10.1177/11297298231218468. Epub 2024 Jan 2.
Short peripheral catheters (SPCs) are used to provide intravenous therapies in hospitalized patients. Recently, the category of SPC has become more complex, with the introduction in clinical practice of "integrated" SPCs (ISPCs), renewed regarding the material (polyurethane rather than polytetrafluoroethylene) and design (large wing; pre-assembled extension; preassembled needle-free connector (NFC)).
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized studies in hospitalized patients, analyzing the risk of overall catheter failure as well as the risk of each type of complication (occlusion, infiltration, thrombophlebitis, and dislodgement) for ISPCs compared to non-integrated SPCs. These systematic review and meta-analysis were registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022322970).
We searched PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials register from April to November 2022.
Included studies:The research identified 1260 articles. After the abstract review, 13 studies were included for full manuscript review and, after that, six papers (4727 patients) were included in the meta-analysis.Description of the effect:We found a significantly reduced risk of catheter failure (pooling all complications) for ISPCs compared to SPCs ( = 0.002 RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.63-0.9). A significant reduction in the risks of occlusion ( = 0.007 RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.56-0.92) was observed. As regards the risk of infiltration, thrombophlebitis, and dislodgement, the analysis showed a trend in favor of ISPCs, though not statistically significant (respectively = 0.2 RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.64-1.1; = 0.25 RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78-1.07; = 0.06 RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.52-1.01).
ISPCs significantly reduce the risks of catheter failure (overall complications) and occlusion. More RCTs are needed to understand if the preassembled ISPC is better than the composted closed system (non-integrated SPC + extension line + NFC).
短外周导管(SPCs)用于为住院患者提供静脉治疗。最近,SPC的类别变得更加复杂,“集成”短外周导管(ISPCs)被引入临床实践,在材料(聚氨酯而非聚四氟乙烯)和设计(大翼;预组装延长管;预组装无针连接器(NFC))方面有了更新。
本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在分析针对住院患者的随机对照试验(RCTs)和半随机研究,比较ISPCs与非集成SPCs的总体导管失败风险以及每种并发症(堵塞、渗漏、血栓性静脉炎和移位)的风险。这些系统评价和荟萃分析已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO,注册号:CRD42022322970)登记。
我们检索了2022年4月至11月的PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane对照临床试验注册库。
纳入研究:该研究共识别出1260篇文章。经过摘要筛选,13项研究被纳入全文评审,之后,6篇论文(4727例患者)被纳入荟萃分析。效应描述:我们发现,与SPCs相比,ISPCs的导管失败风险(汇总所有并发症)显著降低(P = 0.002,RR = 0.65;95%CI:0.63 - 0.9)。堵塞风险也显著降低(P = 0.007,RR = 0.72;95%CI:0.56 - 0.92)。关于渗漏、血栓性静脉炎和移位风险,分析显示ISPCs有优势趋势,但无统计学意义(分别为P = 0.2,RR = 0.84;95%CI:0.64 - 1.1;P = 0.25,RR = 0.91;95%CI:0.78 - 1.07;P = 0.06,RR = 0.72;95%CI:0.52 - 1.01)。
ISPCs显著降低了导管失败(总体并发症)和堵塞的风险。需要更多的随机对照试验来了解预组装的ISPC是否优于组合式封闭系统(非集成SPC + 延长管 + NFC)。