Prospective randomized comparison of valved versus nonvalved peripherally inserted central vein catheters

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a valved peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) design would result in a lower incidence of occlusion, infection, and malfunction than a clamped catheter.Three hundred sixty-two study patients (233 men, 129 women; mean age, 44 years) were randomized to receive a clamped (n = 182) or valved (n = 180) 5-French single-lumen PICC. Catheters were placed under fluoroscopic (n = 331) or sonographic guidance (n = 31). The valved PICC was flushed with saline solution, and the clamped PICC was flushed with a heparin-saline solution. All patients were prospectively followed up at least weekly for catheter status and complications.Percutaneous placement with the catheter tip in the central veins was successful in 99% of patients. Mean dwell time was 34 days. Twenty-six occlusive or infectious complications occurred in the clamped catheter group and 12 in the valved catheter group (p = .02). The clamped and valved catheter groups had 13 and five occlusions, respectively (p = .06), and 12 and five catheter-related blood stream infections, respectively (p = .09). Most occlusions (68%) were treated successfully with urokinase, and site infection or sepsis was treated by catheter removal.We found a statistically significant difference in the complication rate for the valved PICC compared with the clamped PICC. With the valved PICC, occlusion and infection were reduced, and patients having these catheters did not require heparin flushes.