EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Comparison of complications between reverse-tapered and nontapered peripherally inserted central catheters

Hyun Soo Bae, Kun Yung Kim and Young-Min Han

PLOS ONE, 2023, vol. 18, issue 5, 1-10

Abstract: Purpose of this study was to compare the complication rates between reverse-tapered and nontapered peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). In total, 407 patients who had an inpatient clinic-based PICC insertion between September 2019 and November 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Seven PICC types were used (4 reverse tapered: 4-Fr single-lumen (n = 75), 5-Fr single-lumen (n = 78), 5-Fr double-lumen (n = 62), and 6-Fr triple-lumen (n = 61); 3 nontapered: 4-Fr single-lumen (n = 73), 5-Fr double-lumen (n = 30), and 6-Fr triple-lumen (n = 23)). Complications such as periprocedural bleeding, delayed bleeding, inadvertent removal, catheter obstruction by thrombosis, infection, and leakage were investigated. The overall complication rate was 27.1%. The complication rate was significantly higher for nontapered PICCs than reverse-tapered PICCs (50.0% vs 16.7%, P

Date: 2023
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0285445 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 85445&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0285445

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285445

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().

 
Page updated 2025-05-03
Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0285445