1. Perforated intravenous catheter design is acceptable for the administration of contrast-enhanced computed tomography administration in cancer patients: Results of a pilot randomised controlled trial
- Author
-
Gavin, Nicole C, Wignall, Elizabeth, Marsh, Nicole, Marquart, Louise, Dobeli, Karen L, O’Brien, Catherine, Verderosa, Anthony D, Totsika, Makrina, and Keogh, Samantha
- Abstract
Background: Optimising first time success of peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion and reducing intravenous (IV) complications in cancer patients undergoing contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) is vital to ensure vascular access preservation and diagnostic accuracy. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating a novel perforated PIVC compared to a standard PIVC.Methods: A single centre, parallel-group, pilot RCT was conducted between March and May 2020. Adult participants diagnosed with cancer were randomised to a non-perforated PIVC (standard care) or a PIVC with a novel perforated design (intervention) for the administration of IV contrast. There were two primary outcomes: (1) feasibility of an adequately powered RCT with pre-established criteria; and (2) all-cause PIVC failure. Secondary outcomes included: first insertion success, modes of PIVC failure, dwell time, contrast injection parameters (volume and injection rate), contrast enhancement, radiographer satisfaction and adverse events.Results: Feasibility outcomes were met, except for eligibility (⩾90%) and recruitment (⩾90%). In total, 166 participants were screened, 128 (77%) were eligible and of these 101/128 (79%) were randomised; 50 to standard care and 51 to intervention. First time insertion rate was 94% (47/50) in standard care and 90% (46/50) in intervention. The median dwell time was 37 minutes (interquartile range (IQR): 25–55) in standard care and 35 minutes (IQR: 25–60) in the intervention group. There was one PIVC failure, a contrast media extravasation, in the intervention group (1/51; 2%). The desired contrast injection rate was not achieved in 4/101 (4%) of participants; two from each group. Radiographers were satisfied with the contrast flow rate.Conclusions: This pilot RCT suggests perforated PIVCs provide expected flow rate, with no evidence of differences in contrast enhancement to non-perforated PIVCs. The feasibility of conducting a larger powered RCT was demonstrated.
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF