Comparing catheter related bloodstream infection rate between cuffed tunnelled and non-cuffed tunnelled peripherally inserted central catheter

• Main Authors: Sze Yong, Teoh, Vijayanathan, Anushya A. P., Chung, Eric, Ng, Wei Lin, Yaakup, Nur Adura, Sulaiman, Norshazriman
• Format: Article
• Published: Sage Publications Ltd 2022
• Subjects: R Medicine
• Online Access: http://eprints.um.edu.my/42472/

Objective: To compare catheter related blood stream infection (CRBSI) rate between cuffed tunnelled and non-cuffed tunnelled PICC. Methods: We prospectively followed 100 patients (50:50 cuffed and non-cuffed PICC) and compared CRBSI rate between these groups. Daily review and similar catheter care were performed until a PICC-related complication, completion of therapy, death or defined end-of-study date necessitate removal. CRBSI was confirmed in each case by demonstrating concordance between isolates colonizing the PICC at the time of infection and from peripheral blood cultures. Results: A total of 50 cuffed PICC were placed for 1864 catheter-days. Of these, 12 patients (24%) developed infection, for which 5 patients (10%) had a CRBSI for a rate of 2.7 per 1000 catheter-days. Another 50 tunnelled non-cuffed PICCs were placed for 2057 catheter-days. Of these, 7 patients (14%) developed infection, for which 3 patients (6%) had a CRBSI. for a rate of 1.5 per 1000 catheter-days. The mean time to development of infection is 24 days in cuffed and 19 days in non-cuffed groups. The mean duration of utilization was significantly longer in non-cuffed than in cuffed group (43 days in non-cuffed vs 37 days in cuffed group, p = 0.008). Conclusions: Cuffed PICC does not further reduce the rate of local or bloodstream infection. Tunnelled non-cuffed PICC is shown to be as effective if not better at reducing risk of CRBSI and providing longer catheter dwell time compared to cuffed PICC.