Search
"This pilot RCT suggests perforated PIVCs provide expected flow rate, with no evidence of differences in contrast enhancement to non-perforated PIVCs. The feasibility of conducting a larger powered RCT was demonstrated" Gavin et al (2023).

Perforated intravenous catheter design for CT contrast

Abstract:

Background: Optimising first time success of peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion and reducing intravenous (IV) complications in cancer patients undergoing contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) is vital to ensure vascular access preservation and diagnostic accuracy. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating a novel perforated PIVC compared to a standard PIVC.

Methods: A single centre, parallel-group, pilot RCT was conducted between March and May 2020. Adult participants diagnosed with cancer were randomised to a non-perforated PIVC (standard care) or a PIVC with a novel perforated design (intervention) for the administration of IV contrast. There were two primary outcomes: (1) feasibility of an adequately powered RCT with pre-established criteria; and (2) all-cause PIVC failure. Secondary outcomes included: first insertion success, modes of PIVC failure, dwell time, contrast injection parameters (volume and injection rate), contrast enhancement, radiographer satisfaction and adverse events.

Results: Feasibility outcomes were met, except for eligibility (⩾90%) and recruitment (⩾90%). In total, 166 participants were screened, 128 (77%) were eligible and of these 101/128 (79%) were randomised; 50 to standard care and 51 to intervention. First time insertion rate was 94% (47/50) in standard care and 90% (46/50) in intervention. The median dwell time was 37 minutes (interquartile range (IQR): 25-55) in standard care and 35 minutes (IQR: 25-60) in the intervention group. There was one PIVC failure, a contrast media extravasation, in the intervention group (1/51; 2%). The desired contrast injection rate was not achieved in 4/101 (4%) of participants; two from each group. Radiographers were satisfied with the contrast flow rate.

Conclusions: This pilot RCT suggests perforated PIVCs provide expected flow rate, with no evidence of differences in contrast enhancement to non-perforated PIVCs. The feasibility of conducting a larger powered RCT was demonstrated.


Reference:

Gavin NC, Wignall E, Marsh N, Marquart L, Dobeli KL, O’Brien C, Verderosa AD, Totsika M, Keogh S. Perforated intravenous catheter design is acceptable for the administration of contrast-enhanced computed tomography administration in cancer patients: Results of a pilot randomised controlled trial. J Vasc Access. 2023 Jun 1:11297298231171422. doi: 10.1177/11297298231171422. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 37264630.