TY - JOUR
T1 - Usefulness of a peripherally inserted central catheter for total parenteral nutrition in patients with inflammatory bowel disease
AU - Chiba, Hirofumi
AU - Endo, Katsuya
AU - Izumiyama, Yasuhiro
AU - Nakano, Takeru
AU - Okamoto, Daisuke
AU - Ichikawa, Ryo
AU - Nagai, Hiroshi
AU - Matsumoto, Shin
AU - Yokoyama, Naonobu
AU - Yamamoto, Katsutoshi
AU - Shimoyama, Yusuke
AU - Naito, Takeo
AU - Onodera, Motoyuki
AU - Kusaka, Jun
AU - Hiramoto, Keiichiro
AU - Kuroha, Masatake
AU - Kanazawa, Yoshitake
AU - Kimura, Tomoya
AU - Kakuta, Yoichi
AU - Kinouchi, Yoshitaka
AU - Shimosegawa, Tooru
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Backgrounds and Aims: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) have been widely used as a blood access route for total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in recent years. However, there have been few reports that evaluated the usefulness of PICC for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In this study, we compared the clinical courses in patients with IBD who received TPN during their hospitalization by conventional central venous catheters (CVC) and PICC. Patients and Methods: A total of 137 IBD patients were enrolled. The CVC group and the PICC group included 56 and 81 patients, respectively. The clinical courses in both groups were compared retrospectively. Results: As a complication of the puncture, pneumothorax occurred in two patients (3.6%) in the CVC group, but in none (0%) in the PICC group. The PICC group had significantly higher rates of achieving the scheduled TPN without removing the catheter, lower rates of catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI) and longer periods without CRBSI than the CVC group. Conclusion: PICC might be more useful than CVC in terms of safety and the ability to deliver scheduled TPN for IBD patients.
AB - Backgrounds and Aims: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) have been widely used as a blood access route for total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in recent years. However, there have been few reports that evaluated the usefulness of PICC for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In this study, we compared the clinical courses in patients with IBD who received TPN during their hospitalization by conventional central venous catheters (CVC) and PICC. Patients and Methods: A total of 137 IBD patients were enrolled. The CVC group and the PICC group included 56 and 81 patients, respectively. The clinical courses in both groups were compared retrospectively. Results: As a complication of the puncture, pneumothorax occurred in two patients (3.6%) in the CVC group, but in none (0%) in the PICC group. The PICC group had significantly higher rates of achieving the scheduled TPN without removing the catheter, lower rates of catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI) and longer periods without CRBSI than the CVC group. Conclusion: PICC might be more useful than CVC in terms of safety and the ability to deliver scheduled TPN for IBD patients.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85028957519&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85028957519&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 28883293
AN - SCOPUS:85028957519
SN - 0446-6586
VL - 114
SP - 1639
EP - 1648
JO - Japanese Journal of Gastroenterology
JF - Japanese Journal of Gastroenterology
IS - 9
ER -