Literature DB >> 15357790

Consensus recommendations for use of central venous access devices in haemophilia.

B M Ewenstein1, L A Valentino, J M Journeycake, M D Tarantino, A D Shapiro, V S Blanchette, W K Hoots, G R Buchanan, M J Manco-Johnson, G-E Rivard, K L Miller, S Geraghty, J A Maahs, R Stuart, T Dunham, R J Navickis.   

Abstract

Venous access is essential for delivery of haemophilia factor concentrate. Wherever possible, peripheral veins remain the route of choice, and the use of central venous access devices (CVADs) should be limited to cases of clear need in patients with caregivers able to exercise diligence in CVAD care and should continue no longer than necessary. CVADs are of recognized value for repeated administration of coagulation factors in haemophilia, particularly for prophylaxis and immune tolerance therapy and in young children. Evidence to guide best practices has been fragmentary, and standardized methods for CVAD usage have yet to be established. We have developed management recommendations based upon available published evidence as well as extensive clinical experience. These recommendations address patient and CVAD selection; CVAD placement, care and removal; caregiver/patient guidance; and complications, including infection and thrombosis. In the absence of inhibitors, ports are recommended, primarily because of fewer associated infections than with external catheters. For patients with inhibitors, ports also appear to be associated with fewer infections. Infection is the most frequent complication, and recommendations to prevent and treat infections are supported by extensive clinical data and experience. Strict adherence to handwashing and aseptic technique are essential elements of catheter care. Evidence-based data regarding the detection and treatment of CVAD-related thrombotic complications are limited. Caregiver education is an integral part of CVAD use and the procedural practices of users should be regularly re-assessed. These recommendations provide a basis for sound current CVAD practice and are expected to undergo further refinements as new evidence is compiled and clinical experience is gained.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15357790     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2004.00943.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Haemophilia        ISSN: 1351-8216            Impact factor:   4.287


  5 in total

1.  To manage costs of hemophilia, patients need more than clotting factor.

Authors:  Crystal S Blankenship
Journal:  Biotechnol Healthc       Date:  2008-11

2.  Improved treatment feasibility in children with hemophilia using arteriovenous fistulae: the results after seven years of follow-up.

Authors:  Maria Elisa Mancuso; Luisa Berardinelli; Claudio Beretta; Mauro Raiteri; Ermanno Pozzoli; Elena Santagostino
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2009-03-13       Impact factor: 9.941

3.  Long-term results of central venous access devices in children with haemophilia.

Authors:  Manasvi Upadhyaya; Michael Richards; Sarah Buckham; B R Squire
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2009-05-20       Impact factor: 1.827

Review 4.  Hemophilia Care in the Pediatric Age.

Authors:  Marta Bertamino; Francesca Riccardi; Laura Banov; Johanna Svahn; Angelo Claudio Molinari
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 5.  Venous Thromboembolism in Children with Cancer and Blood Disorders.

Authors:  Richard H Ko; Courtney D Thornburg
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 3.418

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.