» Articles » PMID: 32043739

Catheter-related Thrombosis Incidence and Risk Factors in Adult Cancer Patients with Central Venous Access Devices

Overview
Journal Intern Med J
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2020 Feb 12
PMID 32043739
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Central venous access devices (CVAD) are commonly employed in the management of cancer patients. While having several benefits they are associated with significant risks.

Aim: To review the incidence and risk factors for catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) in cancer patients with a CVAD.

Methods: We performed a prospective observational cohort study of adult patients with cancer requiring a CVAD between 1 January 2004 and 29 June 2016. The rate of, and risk factors for the development of, symptomatic CRT were evaluated.

Results: A total of 4920 central lines was inserted into 3130 patients. The incidence of CRT was 3.6%. CRT developed a median of 12 days following line insertion. Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) were associated with the highest rates of CRT (hazards ratio (HR) 22.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-170.6). Older age groups developed CRT at lower rates (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.39-0.84 for age 50-61 years, and HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.45-0.89 for age >61 years) compared to age <50 years. Increased CRT was seen in patients with prior CRT (HR 1.81; 95% CI 1.19-2.77). There was a trend to more CRT events with a Khorana tumour score of 1 compared to those with a score of 0 (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.00-1.88). Hodgkin lymphoma, germ cell and oesophagus cancers had the highest CRT rates. Side of insertion was not associated with thrombosis risk (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.57-1.05; P = 0.10).

Conclusions: Age <50 years, PICC lines and prior CRT were associated with highest CRT rate. Cancer subtype and insertion side were not predictive of thrombosis.

Citing Articles

Development and validation of a risk prediction model for PICC-related venous thrombosis in patients with cancer: a prospective cohort study.

Hu Z, Luo M, He R, Wu Z, Fan Y, Li J Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):4654.

PMID: 39920370 PMC: 11805956. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-89260-1.


Comparison of outcomes from tunnelled femorally inserted central catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters: a propensity score-matched cohort study.

McManus C, Mifflin N, Rivera R, Vause S, Tran T, Ostroff M BMJ Open. 2024; 14(5):e081749.

PMID: 38760049 PMC: 11103188. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081749.


Outcome of antithrombotic therapy in cancer patients with catheter-related thrombosis: a systematic review.

Yin Q, Zheng X, Han L, Huang X, Wang Y, Song Y Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 10:1290822.

PMID: 38162134 PMC: 10756912. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1290822.


Barriers and facilitators for implementing peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) appropriateness guidelines: A longitudinal survey study from 34 Michigan hospitals.

Ray-Barruel G, Horowitz J, McLaughlin E, Flanders S, Chopra V PLoS One. 2022; 17(11):e0277302.

PMID: 36331967 PMC: 9635738. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277302.


Central venous catheter-associated complications in pediatric patients diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma: implications for catheter choice.

van den Bosch C, Spijkerman J, Wijnen M, Kremer Hovinga I, Meyer-Wentrup F, van der Steeg A Support Care Cancer. 2022; 30(10):8069-8079.

PMID: 35776186 PMC: 9512752. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07256-3.