Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to assess the non-inferiority for safety and efficacy of using Midline in comparison with PICC for intravenous therapy that do not require a central catheter.
Vascular access devices (VADs), including peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) remain a cornerstone for the delivery of necessary intravenous therapy. PICCs are being selected for venous access more frequently today than ever before.
The advantage of PICC is that it can be used for all intravenous therapy. However, PICC requires the use of fluoroscopy or other type of guidance which add to the cost and time required to insert the catheter. Midline, on the other hand, can be inserted under ultrasound guidance, takes less time to be inserted and cost less than PICC insertion.
Despite lower cost and better accessibility of midline in comparison with PICC for non-vesicant intravenous therapy, there is very little evidence in the literature to suggest that one type of venous access is better than the other.
The primary objective of this study is to assess the non-inferiority for safety and efficacy of using Midline in comparison with PICC for intravenous therapy that do not require a central catheter.
Results of this trial will allow improving a quality of evidence for using midline instead of PICC for specified indications. If Midline are non-inferior for some indications, they would represent a more accessible and less expensive alternative than PICC insertion.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Peripherally inserted central venous catheters | Active Comparator | Bard PowerPICC |
|
| Midline | Active Comparator | Bard PowerMidline catheter |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bard PowerPICC | Device | PICC Insertion |
| |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| % of patients without VAD-related adverse event requiring medical intervention | Infections, Thrombophlebitis, Infiltration, Bleeding, Pain, Death | Until 1 week after VAD retrieval |
| % of patients whose intended or additional I.V treatments could be completed with the VAD without VAD complications, dysfunctions or limitations (ex: need for central access or for additional peripheral or central lumens/catheters) | Until 1 week after VAD retrieval |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| % of patients who experience VAD-related adverse events requiring medical intervention | Infections, Thrombophlebitis, Infiltration, Bleeding, Pain, Death | Until 1 week after VAD retrieval |
| Number of VAD-related adverse events requiring medical intervention per 1000 catheter/days |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Éric Thérasse, MD | Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM) | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Centre hospitalier de l'université de Montréal | Montreal | Quebec | H2X 3E4 | Canada |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40111366 | Derived | Bentridi A, Giroux MF, Soulez G, Bouchard L, Perreault P, Chouinard A, Dorais M, Do Amaral R, Bernier P, Therasse E. Midline Venous Catheter vs Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter for Intravenous Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Mar 3;8(3):e251258. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.1258. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Bard PowerMidline catheter |
| Device |
Midline Insertion |
|
| Until 1 week after VAD retrieval |
| Time to first VAD-related adverse events | Until 1 week after VAD retrieval |
| Duration VAD intervention (Midline or PICC) | Index procedure |
| Number of additional interventions to insert the VAD | Index procedure |
| % of patients who required another VAD to complete the intended or additional iv treatments, either because of VAD complications, dysfunctions or limitations | Until 1 week after VAD retrieval |
| % of patient without failed blood sampling attempts through the VAD | Until 1 week after VAD retrieval |
| % of patients for whom the end of treatment was the reason for VAD retrieval | Until 1 week after VAD retrieval |