Comparison of complications associated with peripherally inserted central catheters and Hickman™ catheters in patients with intestinal failure receiving home parenteral nutrition. Six-year follow up study

Summary Background & aim Patients with intestinal failure (IF) are dependent on parenteral nutrition delivered through central access such as Hickman™ catheters. The peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) is becoming increasingly popular for the purpose. The aim of the present study was to compare complication rates between the two types of catheters. Patients and methods Over a six-year period (2008–2014), we included 136 patients with IF receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN). These patients had a total of 295 catheters (169 Hickman™ catheters and 126 PICCs). Data were collected by reviewing their medical records. Incidences are given per 1000 catheter days. Data are given as means ± standard deviation (SD) and compared using independent student's t-tests, Mann–Whitney–Wilcoxon, and X 2 -tests. A survival analysis for time to the first infection was conducted using Cox regression. Results The total number of catheter days was 54,912 days for Hickman™ catheters (mean dwell time 325 ± 402) and 15,974 days for PICCs (mean dwell time 127 ± 121), respectively. The incidence of catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI) per 1000 catheter days was significantly lower for Hickman™ catheters compared to PICCs (0.56 vs. 1.63, p  Conclusion We found a higher risk and shorter time to first CRBSI in PICCs compared to Hickman catheters supporting that PICCs should mainly be chosen for planned HPN up to 3–6 months. We therefore conclude that the choice of catheter must still be determined on an individual basis.