Randomized trial of percutaneous central venous lines versus peripheral intravenous lines

Journal of Perinatology

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 92-96

  Wilson, D ^a   Verklan, M T ^b   Kennedy, K A ^c  

^a Memorial Hermann Children's Hospital   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT;

ARTICLE; ATTRIBUTABLE RISK; BLOOD CULTURE; CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETERIZATION; CEREBROSPINAL FLUID CULTURE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; GESTATIONAL AGE; HOSPITAL INFECTION; HUMAN; INFANT; INFANT MORTALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NEWBORN; PENETRANCE; PERIPHERALLY INSERTED CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER; PREMATURITY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEPTICEMIA; SKIN INJURY; TREATMENT DURATION;

CATHETERIZATION; CATHETERIZATION, CENTRAL VENOUS; CATHETERIZATION, PERIPHERAL; CROSS INFECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; INFANT, PREMATURE; INTENSIVE CARE UNITS; MALE; SEPSIS;

EID: 33846698632     PISSN: 07438346     EISSN: 14765543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.jp.7211650     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Stoll BJ, Hansen N, Fanaroff AA, Wright LL, Carlo WA, Ehrenkranz RA et al. Late. onset sepsis in very low birth weight neonates: The experience of the NICHD neonatal research network. Pediatrics 2002; 110: 285-291.
2. Janes M, Kalyn A, Pinelli J, Paes B. A randomized trial comparing peripherally inserted central venous catheters and peripheral intravenous catheters in infants with very low birth weight. J Pediat Surg 2000; 35: 1040-1044.
3. Ainsworth SB, Furness J, Fenton AC. Randomized comparative trial between percutaneous longlines and peripheral cannulae in the delivery of neonatal parenteral nutrition. Acta Paediatr 2001; 90: 1016-1020.
4. Annibale DJ, Bissinger RL, Hulsey TC, Headdon P, Ohning BL. Early percutaneous central venous catheterization (PCVC) in neonates. Pedialr Res 1995; 37: 194A.
5. Ainsworth SB, Clerihew L, McGuire W. Percutaneous central venous catheters versus peripheral cannulae for delivery of parenteral nutrition in neonates [review]. The Cochrane Library 2004; 2: 1-13.
6. Shulz KF, Grimes DA. Sample size calculations in randomized trials: mandatory and mystical. Lancet 2005; 365: 1348-1353.
7. Garland JS, Henrickson K, Maki DG. 2002 Hospital infection control practices advisory committee centers for disease control and prevention. The 2002 hospital infection control practices advisory committee centers of disease control and prevention guideline for prevention of intravascular device-related infection. Pediatrics 2002; 110: 1009-1013.
8. Trotter CW. A national survey of percutaneous central venous catheter practices in neonates. Neonatal Network 1998; 17: 31-38.
9. Golombek SG, Rohan AJ, Parvez B, Salice AL, LaGamma EF. 'Proactive' management of percutaneously inserted central catheters results in decreased incidence of infection in the ELBW population. J Perinatol 2002; 22: 209-213.
10. Puchalski M, Hummel P. The reality of neonatal pain. Adv Neonatal Care 2002; 2: 233-244.
11. Grunau R. Early pain in preterm infants. A model of long term effects. Clin Perinalol 2002; 29: 373-394.
12. Pettit J. Assessment of infants with peripherally inserted central catheters: Part 1. Detecting the most frequent occurring complications. Adv Neonatal Care 2002; 2: 304-315.
13. Beardsall S, White DK, Pinto EM, Kelsall AWR. Pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade as complications of neonatal long lines: Are they really a problem? Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2003; 88: F292-F295.
14. Cartwright DW. Central venous lines in neonates: A study of 2186 catheters. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2004; 89: F504-F508.