The efficacy of midline catheters—a prospective, randomized, active-controlled study

• Main Authors: Emma Bundgaard Nielsen, Louise Antonsen, Camilla Mensel, Nikolaj Milandt, Lars Skov Dalgaard, Britta Skov Illum, Hanne Arildsen, Peter Juhl-Olsen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier 2021-01-01
• Series: International Journal of Infectious Diseases
• Subjects: Midline catheter; Intravenous catheter; PICC; Intravenous therapy
• Online Access: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971220322578

Objectives: This study was performed to investigate whether an intravenous (IV) strategy based on new-generation midline catheters is an efficacious alternative to a conventional IV strategy consisting of peripheral venous catheters and central venous catheters, for patients needing IV therapy exceeding 5 days. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Patients requiring more than 5 days of IV treatment were randomized to either a midline catheter-based IV strategy or a conventional strategy. The primary endpoint was the composite of the insertion of a central venous catheter (CVC) or the need for four or more peripheral venous catheter (PVC) insertions. The secondary outcomes included catheter dwell times and reasons for premature removal. Results: One hundred and twenty patients were included. The fraction of patients receiving four or more PVCs or having a CVC inserted was 12/58 (21%) in the midline group versus 38/58 (66%) in the conventional group (p <  0.001); the number needed to treat was 2.2. The median overall catheter dwell time was 7 days (range 0–60 days) in the midline group and 4 days (range 0–84 days) in the conventional group (p =  0.002). Conclusion: In patients requiring more than 5 days of IV therapy, a midline catheter strategy reduced the need for insertion of a CVC or four or more PVCs.