liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Advantages and disadvantages of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) compared to other central venous lines: A systematic review of the literature
Karolinska Institute, Sweden .
Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Ryhov County Hospital, Sweden .
Skåne University Hospital, Sweden .
Swedish Council Health Technology Assessment SBU, Sweden .
2013 (English)In: Acta Oncologica, ISSN 0284-186X, E-ISSN 1651-226X, Vol. 52, no 5, 886-892 p.Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background. The use of central venous lines carries a significant risk for serious complications and high economic costs. Lately, the peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC) has gained in popularity due to presumed advantages over other central venous lines. The aim of this systematic literature review was to identify scientific evidence justifying the use of PICC. Material and methods. The literature review was performed according to the principles of Cochrane Collaboration. The electronic literature search included common databases up to March 2011. Only those studies rated as high or moderate quality were used for grading of evidence and conclusions. Results. The search resulted in 827 abstracts, 48 articles were read in full text, and 11 met the inclusion criteria. None of the articles was classified as high quality and two had moderate quality. The results of these two studies indicate that PICC increases the risk for deep venous thrombosis (DVT), but decreases the risk for catheter occlusion. The quality of scientific evidence behind these conclusions, however, was limited. Due to the lack of studies with sufficiently high quality, questions such as early complications, patient satisfaction and costs could not be answered. Discussion. We conclude that although PICCs are frequently used in oncology, scientific evidence supporting any advantage or disadvantage of PICC when comparing PICC with traditional central venous lines is limited, apart from a tendency towards increased risk for DVT and a decreased risk for catheter occlusion with PICC.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Informa Healthcare , 2013. Vol. 52, no 5, 886-892 p.
National Category
Social Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-93958DOI: 10.3109/0284186X.2013.773072ISI: 000318655300002OAI: diva2:628294

Funding Agencies|Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment, SBU||

Available from: 2013-06-13 Created: 2013-06-13 Last updated: 2013-06-13

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hammarskjold, Fredrik
By organisation
Department of Clinical and Experimental MedicineFaculty of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Acta Oncologica
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 66 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link