IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0222463.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study

Author

Listed:
  • Manuel Florian Struck
  • Lars Friedrich
  • Stefan Schleifenbaum
  • Holger Kirsten
  • Wolfram Schummer
  • Bernd E Winkler

Abstract

Purpose: Proper fixation of central venous catheters (CVCs) is an integral part of safety to avoid dislodgement and malfunction. However, the effectiveness of different CVC securement sutures is unknown. Methods: Analysis of maximum dislodgement forces for CVCs from three different manufacturers using four different suture techniques in an in vitro tensile loading experiment: 1. “clamp only”, 2. “clamp and compression suture”, 3. “finger trap” and 4. “complete”, i.e., “clamp + compression suture + finger trap”. Twenty-five tests were performed for each of the three CVC models and four securement suture techniques (n = 300 test runs). Results: The primary cause of catheter dislodgement was sliding through the clamp in techniques 1 and 2. In contrast, rupture of the suture was the predominant cause for dislodgement in techniques 2 and 3. Median (IQR 25–75%) dislodgement forces were 26.0 (16.6) N in technique 1, 26.5 (18.8) N in technique 2, 76.7 (18.7) N in technique 3, and 84.8 (11.8) N in technique 4. Post-hoc analysis demonstrated significant differences (P

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel Florian Struck & Lars Friedrich & Stefan Schleifenbaum & Holger Kirsten & Wolfram Schummer & Bernd E Winkler, 2019. "Effectiveness of different central venous catheter fixation suture techniques: An in vitro crossover study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-11, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222463
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222463
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222463
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222463&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0222463?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222463. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.