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.

Authors :
Kim ET
Lee JH
Shim DJ
Kwon Y
Cho SB
Kim KJ
Kim D
Kim J
Kim ES
Jun H
Kim YJ
Kim J
Kim EJ
Kim CJ
Jun KI
Shin MJ
Yoon CJ
Lee S
Song SY
Won JH
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.)

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