Back to Search
Start Over
Subcutaneous tunnelling versus conventional insertion of peripherally inserted central catheters in hospitalized patients (TUNNEL-PICC): a multi-centre, open-label, randomized, controlled trial.
- Source :
-
The Journal of hospital infection [J Hosp Infect] 2025 Jan; Vol. 155, pp. 106-114. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Oct 26. - Publication Year :
- 2025
-
Abstract
- Aim: We aimed to evaluate whether subcutaneous tunnelling in peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) placement could reduce the occurrence of central-line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI).<br />Methods: We conducted an open-label, multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial in five tertiary hospitals. Adult hospitalized patients requiring a PICC were randomized in a one-to-one ratio to conventional (cPICC) or tunnelled PICC (tPICC) arms using a centralized web-based computer-generated stratified randomization. CLABSI rates between groups were compared in a modified intention-to-treat population. Safety including the incidence of exit-site infection or haemorrhage-associated catheter removal were also compared. This trial was registered with Clinical Research Information Service of Republic of Korea (KCT0005521).<br />Findings: From November 2020 to March 2023, 1324 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to tPICC (N = 662) and cPICC (N = 662). This study was terminated early due to the cohort CLABSI rate being lower than estimated, therefore, the original sample size of 1694 would render the study underpowered to detect a difference in CLABSI rates. In the tPICC, CLABSI occurred in 13 of 651 participants over 11,071 catheter-days (1.2/1000 catheter-days), compared with 20 among 650 patients with cPICC over 11,141 catheter-days (1.8/1000 catheter-days, rate ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.30-1.38, P=0.30). The incidence of exit-site infection (29 tPICC, 36 cPICC, P=0.5) and haemorrhage-associated catheter removal (11 tPICC, 11 cPICC, P=0.99) did not show a difference between the two groups.<br />Conclusions: Due to insufficient sample size, this study could not demonstrate a statistically significant CLABSI risk reduction in the tPICC group compared with the cPICC group. Both groups had similar rates of exit site infection and bleeding.<br />Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare no conflicts of interest.<br /> (Copyright © 2024 The Healthcare Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)
- Subjects :
- Humans
Male
Female
Middle Aged
Aged
Tertiary Care Centers
Catheterization, Central Venous adverse effects
Catheterization, Central Venous methods
Catheterization, Central Venous instrumentation
Adult
Republic of Korea epidemiology
Incidence
Aged, 80 and over
Catheter-Related Infections epidemiology
Catheter-Related Infections prevention & control
Catheterization, Peripheral adverse effects
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1532-2939
- Volume :
- 155
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- The Journal of hospital infection
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 39490586
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2024.10.008