Article

Incidence and Acute Complications of Asymptomatic Central Venous Catheter-Related Deep Venous Thrombosis in Critically Ill Children.

Department of Pediatrics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
The Journal of pediatrics (Impact Factor: 4.02). 08/2012; DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2012.06.059
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To determined the current incidence and acute complications of asymptomatic central venous catheter (CVC)-related deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in critically ill children. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a prospective cohort study in 3 pediatric intensive care units. A total of 101 children with newly inserted untunneled CVC were included. CVC-related DVT was diagnosed using compression ultrasonography with color Doppler. RESULTS: Asymptomatic CVC-related DVT was diagnosed in 16 (15.8%) children, which equated to 24.7 cases per 1000 CVC-days. Age was independently associated with DVT. Compared with children aged <1 year, children aged >13 years had significantly higher odds of DVT (aOR, 14.1, 95% CI, 1.9-105.8; P = .01). Other patient demographics, interventions (including anticoagulant use), and CVC characteristics did not differ between children with and without DVT. Mortality-adjusted duration of mechanical ventilation, a surrogate for pulmonary embolism, was statistically similar in the 2 groups (22 ± 9 days in children with DVT vs 23 ± 7 days in children without DVT; P = .34). Mortality-adjusted intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay also were similar in the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Asymptomatic CVC-related DVT is common in critically ill children. However, the acute complications do not seem to differ between children with and without DVT. Larger studies are needed to confirm these results. Future studies should also investigate the chronic complications of asymptomatic CVC-related DVT.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
49 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To review the current literature on venous thromboembolism (VTE) in critically ill children. There is an increasing concern for VTE and its complications in critically ill children. Critically ill children are at increased risk of thromboembolism because of the treatment that they are receiving and their underlying condition. A complex relationship exists between thrombosis and infection. A thrombus is a nidus for infection, while infection increases the risk of thrombosis. Pediatric-specific guidelines for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolism are lacking. Current guidelines are based on the data from adults. Novel anticoagulants are now available for use in adults. Studies are ongoing to determine their safety in children. Risk assessment tools have recently been developed to determine the risk of thromboembolism in critically ill children. Certain molecules are associated with thromboembolism in adults. Pediatric critical care practitioners should be cognizant of the importance of VTE in critically ill children to allow early identification and treatment. Adequately powered clinical trials are critically needed to generate evidence that will guide the treatment and prevention of thromboembolism in critically ill children. Risk assessment tools that incorporate biomarkers may improve our ability to predict the occurrence of thromboembolism in critically ill children.
    Current opinion in pediatrics 04/2014; · 2.01 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although critically ill children are at increased risk for developing deep venous thrombosis, there are few pediatric studies establishing the prevalence of thrombosis or the efficacy of thromboprophylaxis. We tested the hypothesis that thromboprophylaxis is infrequently used in critically ill children even for those in whom it is indicated. Prospective multinational cross-sectional study over four study dates in 2012. Fifty-nine PICUs in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, and the United States. All patients less than 18 years old in the PICU during the study dates and times were included in the study, unless the patients were 1) boarding in the unit waiting for a bed outside the PICU or 2) receiving therapeutic anticoagulation. None. Of 2,484 children in the study, 2,159 (86.9%) had greater than or equal to 1 risk factor for thrombosis. Only 308 children (12.4%) were receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (e.g., aspirin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or unfractionated heparin). Of 430 children indicated to receive pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis based on consensus recommendations, only 149 (34.7%) were receiving it. Mechanical thromboprophylaxis was used in 156 of 655 children (23.8%) 8 years old or older, the youngest age for that device. Using nonlinear mixed effects model, presence of cyanotic congenital heart disease (odds ratio, 7.35; p < 0.001) and spinal cord injury (odds ratio, 8.85; p = 0.008) strongly predicted the use of pharmacologic and mechanical thromboprophylaxis, respectively. Thromboprophylaxis is infrequently used in critically ill children. This is true even for children at high risk of thrombosis where consensus guidelines recommend pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis.
    Critical care medicine 12/2013; · 6.37 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The reported incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in children has increased dramatically over the past decade, and the primary risk factor for VTE in neonates and infants is the presence of a central venous catheter (CVC). Although the associated morbidity and mortality are significant, very few trials have been conducted in children to guide clinicians in the prophylaxis, diagnosis, and treatment of CVC-related VTE. Furthermore, pediatric guidelines for prophylaxis and management of VTE are largely extrapolated from adult data. How then should the anesthesiologist approach central access in children of different ages to lessen the risk of CVC-related VTE or in children with prior thrombosis and vessel occlusion? A comprehensive review of the pediatric and adult literature is presented with the goal of assisting anesthesiologists with point-of-care decision-making regarding the risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment of CVC-related VTE. Illustrative cases are also provided to highlight decision-making in varying situations. The only risk factor strongly associated with CVC-related VTE formation in children is the duration of the indwelling CVC. Several other factors show a trend toward altering the incidence of CVC-related VTE formation and may be under the control of the anesthesiologist placing and managing the catheter. In particular, because children with VTE may live decades with its sequelae and chronic vein thrombosis, careful consideration of lessening the risk of VTE is warranted in every child. Further studies are needed to form a clearer understanding of the risk factors, prophylaxis, and management of CVC-related VTE in children and to guide the anesthesiologist in lessening the risk of VTE.
    Pediatric Anesthesia 05/2014; · 2.44 Impact Factor