36
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effectiveness of heparin versus 0.9% saline solution in maintaining the permeability of central venous catheters: a systematic review Translated title: Eficácia da heparina e soro fisiológico para manter a permeabilidade dos cateteres venosos centrais: revisão sistemática Translated title: Efectividad de la heparina y el suero fisiológico para mantener la permeabilidad de los catéteres venosos centrales: revisión sistemática

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Abstract OBJECTIVE Determining which is the most effective solution (heparin flush compared to 0.9% saline flush) for reducing the risk of occlusions in central venous catheters (CVC) in adults. METHOD The systematic review followed the principles proposed by the Cochrane Handbook; critical analysis, extraction and synthesis of data were performed by two independent researchers; statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan program 5.2.8. RESULTS Eight randomized controlled trials and one cohort study were included and the results of the meta-analysis showed no difference (RR=0.68, 95% CI=0.41-1.10; p=0.12). Analysis by subgroups showed that there was no difference in fully deployed CVC (RR=1.09, CI 95%=0.53-2.22;p=0.82); Multi-Lumen CVC showed beneficial effects in the heparin group (RR=0.53, CI 95%=0.29-0.95; p=0.03); in Double-Lumen CVC for hemodialysis (RR=1.18, CI 95%=0.08-17.82;p=0.90) and Peripherally inserted CVC (RR=0.14, CI 95%=0.01-2.60; p=0.19) also showed no difference. CONCLUSION Saline solution is sufficient for maintaining patency of the central venous catheter, preventing the risks associated with heparin administration.

          Translated abstract

          Resumo OBJETIVO Determinar qual é a solução (flush heparina comparado com oflushde soro fisiológico 0.9%) mais eficaz na redução do risco de oclusões de cateteres venosos centrais (CVC) em adultos. MÉTODO A revisão sistemática seguiu os princípios propostos pelo Cochrane Handbook; a análise crítica, a extração e a síntese dos dados foram realizadas por dois investigadores, isoladamente; e a análise estatística efetuada com recurso ao programa RevMan 5.2.8. RESULTADOS Foram incluídos oito estudos randomizados controlados e um estudo de coorte e os resultados da meta-análise mostram não existir diferenças (RR=0.68, IC 95%=0.41-1.10; p=0.12). A análise por subgrupos mostra que nos CVC totalmente implantados não se verificaram diferenças (RR=1.09, IC 95%=0.53-2.22; p=0.82); nos CVC com vários lúmens existiu um efeito benéfico no grupo da heparina (RR=0.53, IC 95%=0.29-0.95;p=0.03); nos CVC de duplo lúmen para hemodiálise (RR=1.18, IC 95%=0.08-17.82; p=0.90) e nos CVC de inserção periférica (RR=0.14, IC 95%=0.01-2.60; p=0.19) também não se verificaram diferenças. CONCLUSÃO O soro fisiológico é suficiente para manter a permeabilidade dos cateteres venosos centrais, prevenindo os riscos associados à administração da heparina.

          Translated abstract

          Resumen OBJETIVO Determinar cuál es la solución (flush con heparina comparado con el de suero fisiológico al 0,9%) más eficaz en la reducción del riesgo de oclusiones de catéteres venosos centrales (CVC) en adultos. MÉTODO La revisión sistemática siguió los principios propuestos por elCochrane Handbook; el análisis crítico, la extracción y la síntesis de los datos fueron realizados por dos investigadores, aisladamente; y el análisis estadístico fue llevado a cabo con recurso al programa RevMan 5.2.8. RESULTADOS Se incluyeron ocho estudios randomizados controlados y un estudio de cohorte, y los resultados del metaanálisis muestran no existir diferencias (RR=0.68, IC 95%=0.41-1.10; p=0.12). El análisis por subgrupos muestra que en los CVC totalmente implantados no se verificaron diferencias (RR=1.09, IC 95%=0.53-2.22; p=0.82); en los CVC con varios lúmenes existió un efecto benéfico en el grupo de la heparina (RR=0.53, IC 95%=0.29-0.95; p=0.03); en los CVC de doble lumen para hemodiálisis (RR=1.18, IC 95%=0.08-17.82; p=0.90) y en los CVC de inserción periférica (RR=0.14, IC 95%=0.01-2.60;p=0.19) tampoco se verificaron diferencias. CONCLUSIÓN El suero fisiológico es suficiente para mantener la permeabilidad de los catéteres venosos centrales, previniendo los riesgos asociados con la administración de la heparina.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Risk of venous thromboembolism associated with peripherally inserted central catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

          Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism. However, the size of this risk relative to that associated with other central venous catheters (CVCs) is unknown. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the risk of venous thromboembolism associated with PICCs versus that associated with other CVCs. We searched several databases, including Medline, Embase, Biosis, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Conference Papers Index, and Scopus. Additional studies were identified through hand searches of bibliographies and internet searches, and we contacted study authors to obtain unpublished data. All human studies published in full text, abstract, or poster form were eligible for inclusion. All studies were of adult patients aged at least 18 years who underwent insertion of a PICC. Studies were assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa risk of bias scale. In studies without a comparison group, the pooled frequency of venous thromboembolism was calculated for patients receiving PICCs. In studies comparing PICCs with other CVCs, summary odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with a random effects meta-analysis. Of the 533 citations identified, 64 studies (12 with a comparison group and 52 without) including 29 503 patients met the eligibility criteria. In the non-comparison studies, the weighted frequency of PICC-related deep vein thrombosis was highest in patients who were critically ill (13·91%, 95% CI 7·68-20·14) and those with cancer (6·67%, 4·69-8·64). Our meta-analysis of 11 studies comparing the risk of deep vein thrombosis related to PICCs with that related to CVCs showed that PICCs were associated with an increased risk of deep vein thrombosis (OR 2·55, 1·54-4·23, p<0·0001) but not pulmonary embolism (no events). With the baseline PICC-related deep vein thrombosis rate of 2·7% and pooled OR of 2·55, the number needed to harm relative to CVCs was 26 (95% CI 13-71). PICCs are associated with a higher risk of deep vein thrombosis than are CVCs, especially in patients who are critically ill or those with a malignancy. The decision to insert PICCs should be guided by weighing of the risk of thrombosis against the benefit provided by these devices. None. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Incidence of catheter-related complications in patients with central venous or hemodialysis catheters: a health care claims database analysis

            Background Central venous catheter (CVC) and hemodialysis (HD) catheter usage are associated with complications that occur during catheter insertion, dwell period, and removal. This study aims to identify and describe the incidence rates of catheter-related complications in a large patient population in a United States-based health care claims database after CVC or HD catheter placement. Methods Patients in the i3 InVision DataMart® health care claims database with at least 1 CVC or HD catheter insertion claim were categorized into CVC or HD cohorts using diagnostic and procedural codes from the US Renal Data System, American College of Surgeons, and American Medical Association’s Physician Performance Measures. Catheter-related complications were identified using published diagnostic and procedural codes. Incidence rates (IRs)/1000 catheter-days were calculated for complications including catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs), thrombosis, embolism, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), major bleeding (MB), and mechanical catheter–related complications (MCRCs). Results Thirty percent of the CVC cohort and 54% of the HD cohort had catheter placements lasting <90 days. Catheter-related complications occurred most often during the first 90 days of catheter placement. IRs were highest for CRBSIs in both cohorts (4.0 [95% CI, 3.7-4.3] and 5.1 [95% CI, 4.7-5.6], respectively). Other IRs in CVC and HD cohorts, respectively, were thrombosis, 1.3 and 0.8; MCRCs, 0.6 and 0.7; embolism, 0.4 and 0.5; MB, 0.1 and 0.3; and ICH, 0.1 in both cohorts. Patients with cancer at baseline had significantly higher IRs for CRBSIs and thrombosis than non-cancer patients. CVC or HD catheter–related complications were most frequently seen in patients 16 years or younger. Conclusions The risk of catheter-related complications is highest during the first 90 days of catheter placement in patients with CVCs and HD catheters and in younger patients (≤16 years of age) with HD catheters. Data provided in this study can be applied toward improving patient care.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comparing normal saline versus diluted heparin to lock non-valved totally implantable venous access devices in cancer patients: a randomised, non-inferiority, open trial.

              Heparin has been used for years as a locking solution in totally implantable venous access devices. Normal saline (NS) might be a safe alternative for heparin. However, evidence of non-inferiority of NS versus heparin is lacking.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Journal
                reeusp
                Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP
                Rev. esc. enferm. USP
                Universidade de São Paulo, Escola de Enfermagem (São Paulo )
                1980-220X
                December 2015
                : 49
                : 6
                : 995-1003
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Escola Superior de Enfermagem de Coimbra Portugal
                [2 ] Instituto Politécnico de Viseu Portugal
                Article
                S0080-62342015000600995
                10.1590/S0080-623420150000600017
                27419685
                004e3186-051f-4c05-ac06-3d6f53270dc9

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                Product

                SciELO Brazil

                Self URI (journal page): http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=0080-6234&lng=en
                Categories
                NURSING

                Nursing
                Catheterization, Central Venous,Heparin,Sodium Chloride,Central Venous Catheters,Review,Cateterismo Venoso Central,Heparina,Cloreto de Sódio,Cateteres Venosos Centrais,Revisão,Cloruro de Sodio,Catéteres Venosos Centrales,Revisión

                Comments

                Comment on this article