Catheter-Associated Deep Vein Thrombosis (CADVT) in a Pediatric ICU: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

Highlights Abstract Introduction: Catheter-associated deep vein thrombosis (CADVT) in children has been recognized as a significant hospital-acquired condition. This study was undertaken to retrospectively analyze the impact of CADVT on outcomes and to identify risk factors for the development of deep vein thrombosis in children with central venous catheters. Methods: This was a single-center retrospective case-control study of patients with central venous catheters in a pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2014 to December 2018. Forty-one patients with central venous catheters who developed CADVT were compared with 100 random controls. Central venous catheter type, along with patient and disease-specific characteristics, were compared between the two groups by univariate and multivariate regression. Outcome comparison was made after adjusting for confounding variables. Results: Median time from insertion to the development of CADVT was 4 days (interquartile range, 2–9). Forty percent (16/40) of patients had a blood urea nitrogen greater than 20 mg/dL, and 86.6% (13/15) had a C-reactive protein greater than 1 mg/dL within 48 hours of development of CADVT. Central venous catheter duration (odds ratio [OR], 1.05), mechanical ventilation (OR, 7.49), and upper versus lower extremity site of the central venous catheter (OR, 0.324) were associated with the development of CADVT. Ultrasound guidance occurred significantly less in patients who developed CADVT (39.3% vs 70.7%); however, it was not independently associated with increased risk. Age, body mass index, mechanical ventilation, and severity of illness–adjusted hospital and ICU length of stay were significantly higher in patients who developed CADVT. Conclusions: CADVT is independently associated with worse outcomes. Ultrasound guidance and site selection are potential modifiable risk factors in the development of CADVT in pediatric patients. Future studies should target an effective chemoprophylaxis regimen.

Download Full-text

Central venous catheters and upper-extremity deep-vein thrombosis complicating immune heparin-induced thrombocytopenia

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2002-05-1448 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 101 (8) ◽

pp. 3049-3051 ◽

Cited By ~ 114

Author(s):

Aaron P. Hong ◽

Deborah J. Cook ◽

Christopher S. Sigouin ◽

Theodore E. Warkentin

Keyword(s):

Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽

Upper Extremity ◽

Orthopedic Surgery ◽

Venous Catheter ◽

Central Venous Catheters ◽

Central Venous ◽

Heparin Induced Thrombocytopenia ◽

Vein Thrombosis ◽

Deep Vein ◽

Limb Deep Vein Thrombosis

Abstract Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is a transient antibody-mediated hypercoagulability state strongly associated with lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (DVT). Whether HIT is additionally associated with upper-limb DVT—either with or without central venous catheter (CVC) use—is unknown. We therefore studied 260 patients with antibody-positive HIT to determine the influence of CVC use on frequency and localization of upper-extremity DVT in comparison with 2 non-HIT control populations (postoperative orthopedic surgery and intensive-care unit patients). Compared with the control populations, both upper- and lower-extremity DVTs were found to be associated with HIT. Upper-extremity DVTs occurred more frequently in HIT patients with a CVC (14 of 145 [9.7%]) versus none of 115 (0%) patients without a CVC (P = .000 35). All upper-extremity DVTs occurred at the CVC site (right, 12; left, 2; kappa = 1.0; P = .011). We conclude that a localizing vascular injury (CVC use) and a systemic hypercoagulability disorder (HIT) interact to explain upper-extremity DVT complicating HIT.

Download Full-text

Upper Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis - Incidence, Risk Factors, and Management. The Worcester Venous Thromboembolism Study.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v106.11.584.584 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 106 (11) ◽

pp. 584-584

Author(s):

Frederick A. Spencer3 ◽

Robert J. Goldberg ◽

Darleen Lessard ◽

Cathy Emery ◽

Apar Bains ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽

Venous Thromboembolism ◽

Central Venous Catheter ◽

Lower Extremity ◽

Upper Extremity ◽

Venous Catheter ◽

Central Venous ◽

Vein Thrombosis ◽

Deep Vein

Abstract Background: Recent observations suggest that upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) has become more common over the last few decades. However the prevalence of this disorder within the community has not been established. The purpose of this study was to compare the occurrence rate, risk factor profile, management strategies, and hospital outcomes in patients with upper versus lower extremity DVT in a cohort of all Worcester residents diagnosed with venous thromboembolism (VTE) in 1999. Methods: The medical records of all residents from the Worcester, MA statistical metropolitan area (2000 census=478,000) diagnosed with ICD-9 codes consistent with possible DVT and/or pulmonary embolism at all 11 Worcester hospitals during the years 1999, 2001, and 2003 are being reviewed by trained data abstractors. Validation of each case of VTE is performed using prespecified criteria. Results: A total of 483 cases have been validated as acute DVT events - this represents all cases of DVT occurring in residents of the Worcester SMSA in 1999. For purposes of this analysis we have excluded 4 patients with both upper and lower extremity DVT. Upper extremity DVT was diagnosed in 68 (14.2%) of patients versus 411 (85.8%) cases of lower extremity DVT. Patients with upper extremity DVT were younger, more likely to be Hispanic, more likely to have renal disease and more likely to have had a recent central venous catheter, infection, surgery, ICU stay, or chemotherapy than patients with lower extremity DVT. They were less likely to have had a prior DVT or to have developed their current DVT as an outpatient. Although less likely to be treated with heparin, LMWH, or warfarin they were more likely to suffer major bleeding complications. Recurrence rates of VTE during hospitalization were very low in both groups. Conclusions: Patients with upper extremity DVT comprise a small but clinically important proportion of all patients with DVT in the community setting. Their risk profiles differs from patients with lower extremity DVT suggesting strategies for DVT prophylaxis and treatment for this group may need to be tailored. Characteristics of Patients with Upper versus Lower Extremity DVT Upper extremity (n=68) Lower extremity (n=417) P value *Recent = < 3 months Demographics Mean Age, yrs 59.3 66.5 <0.001 Male (%) 51.5 45 NS Race (%) <0.05 White 86.6 91.6 Black 1.5 3.2 Hispanic 9.0 2.0 VTE Setting (%) <0.001 Community 53.8 76.2 Hospital Acquired 46.2 23.8 Risk Factors (%) Recent Central Venous Catheter 61.8 11.9 <0.001 Recent Infection 48.5 32.4 <0.01 Recent Surgery 47.8 28.1 <0.001 Cancer 44.1 32.6 0.06 Recent Immobility 38.2 47.0 NS Recent chemotherapy 25 9.5 <0.001 Renal disease 23.5 1.7 <0.0001 Recent ICU discharge 23.5 15.1 0.07 Recent CHF 19.1 16.6 NS Previous DVT 3.0 18.7 <0.01 Anticoagulant prophylaxis (%) During hospital admission (n=125) 76.7 71.6 NS During recent prior hospital admission (n=188) 73.7 54.7 <0.05 During recent surgery (n=146) 62.5 55.3 NS Hospital therapy - treatment doses (%) Any heparin/LMWH 66.2 82 <0.01 Warfarin at discharge 53.1 71.2 <0.01 Hospital Outcomes (%) Length of stay (mean, d) 11.2 6.8 <0.01 Major bleeding 11.8 4.9 <0.05 Recurrent DVT 1.5 1.0 NS Recurrent PE 0 0.2 NS Hospital Mortality 4.5 4.1 NS

Download Full-text