Randomised comparison of silicone versus Teflon cannulas for peripheral intravenous nutrition.

Abstract The use of peripheral intravenous nutrition using standard Teflon cannulas is limited by a high incidence of thrombophlebitis, with resultant frequent line changes and compromised nutritional therapy. Fine-bore silicone catheters may reduce the incidence of thrombophlebitis; we prospectively compared the silicone catheter with a Teflon cannula in a randomised trial. Seventy-nine surgical patients were randomised to receive peripheral nutrition (10 g nitrogen; 1770 kcal; 650 mOsm/l) either via a Teflon cannula (18G, 4.4 cm long) or via a silicone catheter (23G, 15 cm long). Compared with the group randomised to a standard Teflon cannula, patients fed via a silicone catheter had a significant (P < 0.001) improvement in (a) median time to survival of the first catheter (125 h vs 48 h); (b) incidence of catheter reinsertions (13% vs 75%); and (c) incidence of thrombophlebitis (10% vs 48%). Delivery of a moderately hypertonic nutritional solution through a fine-bore silicone catheter is safe, durable and well tolerated, with a low incidence of complications relative to a Teflon cannula. An expanded role for this catheter in nutritional therapy is feasible, which may reduce the requirement for central venous parenteral nutrition.