{"title":"化疗癌症患者置入隧道式和非隧道式外周置入中心导管的并发症:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Jiana Hong, Xiaodan Mao","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2024.1469847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tunneled peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) have potential to reduce complications compared to non-tunneled PICC in previous studies. Which is better is debatable. Thus, the aim to compare the effect of tunneled and non-tunneled PICC for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library database, and CNKI were searched from inception to March 15, 2024. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) was calculated to assess the complications of tunneled and non-tunneled PICC for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy using random- or fixed-effects models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 12 articles were retrieved. Meta-analysis showed that tunneled PICC significantly decreased the risk of wound oozing (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.20-0.41), infection risk (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.20-0.85), thrombosis risk (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.15-0.44), phlebitis risk (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.13-0.40), and catheter dislodgement risk (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.22-0.50) compared to non-tunneled PICC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The subcutaneous tunneling technology has advantages over normal technique in decreasing PICC-related complications for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO (CRD42024522862).</p>","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11518809/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complications of tunneled and non-tunneled peripherally inserted central catheter placement in chemotherapy-treated cancer patients: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jiana Hong, Xiaodan Mao\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fsurg.2024.1469847\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tunneled peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) have potential to reduce complications compared to non-tunneled PICC in previous studies. Which is better is debatable. Thus, the aim to compare the effect of tunneled and non-tunneled PICC for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library database, and CNKI were searched from inception to March 15, 2024. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) was calculated to assess the complications of tunneled and non-tunneled PICC for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy using random- or fixed-effects models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 12 articles were retrieved. Meta-analysis showed that tunneled PICC significantly decreased the risk of wound oozing (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.20-0.41), infection risk (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.20-0.85), thrombosis risk (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.15-0.44), phlebitis risk (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.13-0.40), and catheter dislodgement risk (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.22-0.50) compared to non-tunneled PICC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The subcutaneous tunneling technology has advantages over normal technique in decreasing PICC-related complications for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO (CRD42024522862).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12564,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11518809/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1469847\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1469847","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Complications of tunneled and non-tunneled peripherally inserted central catheter placement in chemotherapy-treated cancer patients: a meta-analysis.
Background: Tunneled peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) have potential to reduce complications compared to non-tunneled PICC in previous studies. Which is better is debatable. Thus, the aim to compare the effect of tunneled and non-tunneled PICC for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.
Methods: Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library database, and CNKI were searched from inception to March 15, 2024. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) was calculated to assess the complications of tunneled and non-tunneled PICC for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy using random- or fixed-effects models.
Results: A total of 12 articles were retrieved. Meta-analysis showed that tunneled PICC significantly decreased the risk of wound oozing (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.20-0.41), infection risk (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.20-0.85), thrombosis risk (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.15-0.44), phlebitis risk (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.13-0.40), and catheter dislodgement risk (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.22-0.50) compared to non-tunneled PICC.
Conclusions: The subcutaneous tunneling technology has advantages over normal technique in decreasing PICC-related complications for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.
期刊介绍:
Evidence of surgical interventions go back to prehistoric times. Since then, the field of surgery has developed into a complex array of specialties and procedures, particularly with the advent of microsurgery, lasers and minimally invasive techniques. The advanced skills now required from surgeons has led to ever increasing specialization, though these still share important fundamental principles.
Frontiers in Surgery is the umbrella journal representing the publication interests of all surgical specialties. It is divided into several “Specialty Sections” listed below. All these sections have their own Specialty Chief Editor, Editorial Board and homepage, but all articles carry the citation Frontiers in Surgery.
Frontiers in Surgery calls upon medical professionals and scientists from all surgical specialties to publish their experimental and clinical studies in this journal. By assembling all surgical specialties, which nonetheless retain their independence, under the common umbrella of Frontiers in Surgery, a powerful publication venue is created. Since there is often overlap and common ground between the different surgical specialties, assembly of all surgical disciplines into a single journal will foster a collaborative dialogue amongst the surgical community. This means that publications, which are also of interest to other surgical specialties, will reach a wider audience and have greater impact.
The aim of this multidisciplinary journal is to create a discussion and knowledge platform of advances and research findings in surgical practice today to continuously improve clinical management of patients and foster innovation in this field.