An interventional study of Ultrasound guidance for PICC line placement in Ultrasonography, Interventional and Peripheral Venous Catheterization, sponsored by Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 1 Day to 28 Days. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-07-30.
Sponsored by Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care
This is a randomized controlled study comparing US guided vs standard procedure for PICC line placement in newborns admitted to Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Neonatal Intensive Care Unit who require a PICC line. Patients will be randomized using REDCap randomization module (stratified by gestational age \< 28 weeks and >= 28 weeks and blocked to ensure approximate balance with each stratum) into two arms. - Arm 1: PICC line insertion procedure using anatomical landmarks and tip placement will be confirmed by X-ray (current standard); Arm 2: US guided PICC line insertion procedure and tip placement confirmation by both US and X-ray. Sample size of 33 infants per group would achieve greater than 80% power to detect a difference between groups.
Primary outcome: Time to complete the standard versus the US-guided procedure.
Secondary outcomes (comparison between two arms):
The number of total "venipuncture" attempts needed to place a PICC line Number of tip manipulations after complete insertion Proportion of successful tip placement
Background Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) line placement is one of the most commonly performed procedures in Neonatology. Due to prematurity and small vein size, the procedure often requires multiple attempts over an increased timeframe. As a standard of care, the position is confirmed by X-ray. Frequently, catheters are not optimally positioned, necessitating repositioning and further radiographs.
The use of ultrasound (US) guidance for PICC line placement enhances the visualization of the veins and provides a better selection for optimal access. It could decrease or even eliminate the need for X-rays when used to confirm the tip position.
Objectives To demonstrate that using US-guidance to place and confirm tip positioning for PICC line insertion in neonates will decrease the number of cannulation attempts, will shorten the time needed to complete the procedure, and will decrease infants' exposure to radiation.
Methods This is a randomized controlled study comparing US guided vs standard procedure for PICC line placement in newborns admitted to CHEO NICU who require a PICC line (approximately 130-150 infants per year). Patients will be randomized using REDCap randomization module (stratified by gestational age \< 28 weeks and >= 28 weeks and blocked to ensure approximate balance with each stratum) into two arms - Arm 1: PICC line insertion procedure using anatomical landmarks and tip placement will be confirmed by X-ray (current standard); Arm 2: US guided PICC line insertion procedure and tip placement confirmation by both US and X-ray. A sample size of 33 infants per group would be sufficient to achieve greater than 80% power to detect a difference between groups.
Results of this study may demonstrate that US guided PICC line placement is superior (shorter and safer procedure, reduced radiation and pain) to currently used procedure and could lead to practice change.
Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario is the lead sponsor of 83 studies on the registry; 9 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
All newborns (0-28 days) admitted to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit who require PICC line insertion after consent has been obtained to include in this study. Including:
Exclusion Criteria:
PICC line insertion using anatomical landmarks guidance and tip placement confirmation by X-ray
Ultrasound guidance for PICC line placement and X-ray
Procedure: Ultrasound guidance for PICC line placement
Apply ultrasound guidance for PICC line placement and positioning in newborns
Time to complete the standard versus the US-guided procedure
Comparison between total time of procedure with standard approach vs US guidance measured in minutes.
Time frame: one year
Number of total venipuncture attempts needed to place a PICC line
Number of venipuncture attempts will be documented per patient through the whole duration of study and then both groups will be compared differences in number
Time frame: One year
Number of tip manipulations after complete insertion
Number of manipulations of tip line for adequate placement will be documented on each patient and then compared against control group to assess for differences in number.
Time frame: One year
Proportion of successful tip placement
Total number of correct position of PICC line tip will be documented in both groups and then compared to control.
Time frame: One year
This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario