A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Usefulness of central venous catheter replacement with a guidewire in patients with intestinal failure: a single-center study. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: Patients with intestinal failure (IF) require long-term parenteral nutrition using central venous catheters (CVCs), which often require replacement. We adopted a less fallible guidewire replacement (GWR) method and verified its effectiveness and validity.

Methods: We enrolled 108 cases that underwent a CVC replacement with "GWR" method with IF at our department between 2013 and 2023. We retrospectively reviewed patients' clinical details with tunneled CVC (Hickman/Broviac catheter). For the analysis, we compared for the same time period the catheter exchange method "Primary placement"; newly inserted catheter by venipuncture.

Results: The success rate of catheter replacement using GWR was 94.4%. There were six unsuccessful cases. A log-rank test showed no significant difference in catheter survival between primary placement and the GWR, and the time to first infection was significantly longer in the GWR (p = 0.001). Furthermore, no significant differences were observed between the two methods until the first infection, when the exchange indication was limited to infections. In the same way, when the indication was restricted to catheter-related bloodstream infection, there was no significant difference in catheter survival between the two approaches.

Conclusion: Our GWR procedure was easy to perform and stable, with a high success rate and almost no complications. Moreover, using a guidewire did not increase the frequency of catheter replacement and the infection rate.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00383-024-05806-wDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

catheter replacement
12
central venous
8
catheter
8
patients intestinal
8
intestinal failure
8
replacement gwr
8
success rate
8
difference catheter
8
catheter survival
8
replacement
6

Similar Publications