1Hajar Andour, 1Mohamed Lahkim

1Military Hospital Mohamed V, Rabat, Morocco

Background:

We sought to : 1) Set indications of PICC Lines and Midlines. 2) Detail the technique of their insertion. 3) Compare them to one another and their complications to those of similar devices.

Background : PICC Lines and Midlines are two types of vascular access devices having expanded since a decade. They came mainly as   an alternative to Central Venous Catheters and chemotherapy ports when the capital venous is poor. However, the increasing types of vascular accesses, the same insertion site – peripherally in the arm – can be a source of confusion of these devices.

Material(s) and Method(s):

We reviewed 93 cases of Peripherally Implanted Devices over a period of 41 months at a single center- Radiology Department of The Military Hospital of Rabat in Morocco – analyzing patients age, indications of catheters, duracy of implantation, frequency of maintenance, and complications.

Result(s):

The two main indications were chemotherapy ( 75% PICC Lines vs 17% Midlines) and antibiotics therapy ( 20% PICC Lines vs 70% Midlines). Per-Procedural complications were seen with PICC Lines while post-procedural ones were more frequent with Midlines. These complications were dominated by phlebitis met in 3% of PICC Lines versus 35,7% of Midlines and accidental removal met in 3% versus 28,5% respectively.

Conclusion(s):

Peripherally inserted catheters are of great contribution especially for oncology and hematology patients. They require to be well formed in order to decrease complications which remain less important or comparable to those of other vascular access devices whose indications are sometimes limited.