4.6 Article

Incidence and Acute Complications of Asymptomatic Central Venous Catheter-Related Deep Venous Thrombosis in Critically Ill Children

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
卷 162, 期 2, 页码 387-391

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2012.06.059

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Center for Research Resources, a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [UL1 RR024139]
  2. NIH Roadmap for Medical Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To determined the current incidence and acute complications of asymptomatic central venous catheter (CVC)-related deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in critically ill children. Study design We performed a prospective cohort study in 3 pediatric intensive care units. A total of 101 children with newly inserted untunneled CVC were included. CVC-related DVT was diagnosed using compression ultrasonography with color Doppler. Results Asymptomatic CVC-related DVT was diagnosed in 16 (15.8%) children, which equated to 24.7 cases per 1000 CVC-days. Age was independently associated with DVT. Compared with children aged <1 year, children aged >13 years had significantly higher odds of DVT (aOR, 14.1, 95% CI, 1.9-105.8; P = .01). Other patient demographics, interventions (including anticoagulant use), and CVC characteristics did not differ between children with and without DVT. Mortality-adjusted duration of mechanical ventilation, a surrogate for pulmonary embolism, was statistically similar in the 2 groups (22 +/- 9 days in children with DVT vs 23 +/- 7 days in children without DVT; P = .34). Mortality-adjusted intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay also were similar in the 2 groups. Conclusion Asymptomatic CVC-related DVT is common in critically ill children. However, the acute complications do not seem to differ between children with and without DVT. Larger studies are needed to confirm these results. Future studies should also investigate the chronic complications of asymptomatic CVC-related DVT. (J Pediatr 2013;162:387-91).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据