Safety of Mini-Midline Catheters for Intravenous Antimicrobial Therapy Not Exceeding 14 Days: Treatment Completion Rate and Re-Catheterization Needs.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy Pub Date : 2026-09-24 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.2147/RMHP.S620305
Lihong Liao, Jianfang Zhang, Liqin Li, Yuling Feng, Qiu Sun, Yiqing Shen, Xiaojing Ma, Chaoyi Dong, Lihua Shi
{"title":"Safety of Mini-Midline Catheters for Intravenous Antimicrobial Therapy Not Exceeding 14 Days: Treatment Completion Rate and Re-Catheterization Needs.","authors":"Lihong Liao, Jianfang Zhang, Liqin Li, Yuling Feng, Qiu Sun, Yiqing Shen, Xiaojing Ma, Chaoyi Dong, Lihua Shi","doi":"10.2147/RMHP.S620305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate whether ultrasound-guided mini-midline catheter use (8-15 cm) is associated with treatment completion and safety outcomes compared with short peripheral catheters (<8 cm) for intravenous antimicrobial therapy lasting no more than 14 days, while additionally characterizing device specifications, peripheral drug compatibility, and cumulative vascular-access burden.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center retrospective comparative cohort study included 134 hospitalized adults (55 mini-midline, 79 short PIVC) receiving planned intravenous antimicrobial therapy for 5-14 days. The primary endpoint was treatment completion through the index device. Secondary outcomes included catheter-related complications, re-catheterization, cumulative catheter burden, inflammatory markers, and descriptively summarized dwell time among devices with documented insertion and removal timestamps.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Treatment completion was 46/51 (90.2%) for mini-midlines and 79/79 (100.0%) for short PIVCs (unadjusted p=0.005; absolute RD -9.8%; Holm-adjusted p=0.015). Among devices with documented timestamps, median dwell time was 310.0 hours (12.9 days) for mini-midlines and 71.5 hours (3.0 days) for short PIVCs. Complication rates were low, with 3/55 mini-midline patients experiencing 5 catheter-related events and 0/79 short-PIVC patients experiencing catheter-related events. No bloodstream infection or symptomatic thrombosis occurred in either group. Mini-midline patients required fewer total PIVCs per treatment episode, while cumulative insertion attempts were 61 and 85 in the mini-midline and short-PIVC groups, respectively. Diabetes mellitus and ≥2 puncture attempts were associated with treatment non-completion in the mini-midline group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ultrasound-guided mini-midlines were associated with acceptable safety, longer observed peripheral dwell time, and reduced overall PIVC burden in selected hospitalized patients receiving up to 14 days of peripherally compatible intravenous antimicrobial therapy. Mini-midlines should be considered a complementary vascular-access strategy rather than a universal replacement for short PIVCs.</p>","PeriodicalId":56009,"journal":{"name":"Risk Management and Healthcare Policy","volume":"19 ","pages":"620305"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13618561/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Management and Healthcare Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S620305","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate whether ultrasound-guided mini-midline catheter use (8-15 cm) is associated with treatment completion and safety outcomes compared with short peripheral catheters (<8 cm) for intravenous antimicrobial therapy lasting no more than 14 days, while additionally characterizing device specifications, peripheral drug compatibility, and cumulative vascular-access burden.

Methods: This single-center retrospective comparative cohort study included 134 hospitalized adults (55 mini-midline, 79 short PIVC) receiving planned intravenous antimicrobial therapy for 5-14 days. The primary endpoint was treatment completion through the index device. Secondary outcomes included catheter-related complications, re-catheterization, cumulative catheter burden, inflammatory markers, and descriptively summarized dwell time among devices with documented insertion and removal timestamps.

Results: Treatment completion was 46/51 (90.2%) for mini-midlines and 79/79 (100.0%) for short PIVCs (unadjusted p=0.005; absolute RD -9.8%; Holm-adjusted p=0.015). Among devices with documented timestamps, median dwell time was 310.0 hours (12.9 days) for mini-midlines and 71.5 hours (3.0 days) for short PIVCs. Complication rates were low, with 3/55 mini-midline patients experiencing 5 catheter-related events and 0/79 short-PIVC patients experiencing catheter-related events. No bloodstream infection or symptomatic thrombosis occurred in either group. Mini-midline patients required fewer total PIVCs per treatment episode, while cumulative insertion attempts were 61 and 85 in the mini-midline and short-PIVC groups, respectively. Diabetes mellitus and ≥2 puncture attempts were associated with treatment non-completion in the mini-midline group.

Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided mini-midlines were associated with acceptable safety, longer observed peripheral dwell time, and reduced overall PIVC burden in selected hospitalized patients receiving up to 14 days of peripherally compatible intravenous antimicrobial therapy. Mini-midlines should be considered a complementary vascular-access strategy rather than a universal replacement for short PIVCs.

静脉抗菌治疗不超过14天的迷你中线导管的安全性:治疗完成率和再次置管需求。
目的:评价超声引导下使用迷你中线导管(8-15 cm)与短外周导管相比是否与治疗完成度和安全性相关。方法:这项单中心回顾性比较队列研究纳入了134名住院成人(55名迷你中线,79名短PIVC),他们接受了5-14天的静脉抗菌治疗。主要终点是通过索引装置完成治疗。次要结局包括导管相关并发症、再置管、累积导管负担、炎症标记物,以及记录插入和取出时间戳的器械间描述性总结的停留时间。结果:小中线的治疗完成率为46/51(90.2%),短pivc的治疗完成率为79/79(100.0%)(未经校正p=0.005;绝对RD -9.8%; holm校正p=0.015)。在记录时间戳的设备中,迷你中线的中位停留时间为310.0小时(12.9天),短pivc的中位停留时间为71.5小时(3.0天)。并发症发生率低,3/55的迷你中线患者出现5个导管相关事件,0/79的短pivc患者出现导管相关事件。两组均未发生血流感染或症状性血栓形成。迷你中线患者每次治疗需要较少的总pivc,而迷你中线组和短pivc组的累计插入次数分别为61次和85次。在迷你中线组中,糖尿病和≥2次穿刺尝试与治疗不完成相关。结论:超声引导的迷你中线具有可接受的安全性,更长的观察外周停留时间,并减少了接受外周相容静脉抗菌治疗14天的住院患者的总体PIVC负担。迷你中线应被视为一种补充血管通路策略,而不是短pivc的普遍替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
2.90%
发文量
242
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Risk Management and Healthcare Policy is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal focusing on all aspects of public health, policy and preventative measures to promote good health and improve morbidity and mortality in the population. Specific topics covered in the journal include: Public and community health Policy and law Preventative and predictive healthcare Risk and hazard management Epidemiology, detection and screening Lifestyle and diet modification Vaccination and disease transmission/modification programs Health and safety and occupational health Healthcare services provision Health literacy and education Advertising and promotion of health issues Health economic evaluations and resource management Risk Management and Healthcare Policy focuses on human interventional and observational research. The journal welcomes submitted papers covering original research, clinical and epidemiological studies, reviews and evaluations, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary, and extended reports. Case reports will only be considered if they make a valuable and original contribution to the literature. The journal does not accept study protocols, animal-based or cell line-based studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书