Catheter Complications

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare a chlorhexidine antimicrobial barrier cap in patients requiring hemodialysis treatment to the standard hemodialysis caps currently used within the Metro North Kidney Health Service. The main questions to answer are: * Study Feasibility * Occurrence of infectious complications related to renal central venous catheters Participants will be randomly allocated to receive either of the below hemodialysis caps to cover their hemodialysis catheter hub: * The standard hemodialysis cap used at the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, or * The intervention hemodialysis cap containing chlorhexidine inside it Researchers will compare standard and chlorhexidine hemodialysis caps to see if the presence of chlorhexidine improves the occurrance of infectious complications related to the hemodialysis catheter.

Particulate contamination due to infusion therapy (administration of parenteral nutrition and medications) carries a potential health risk for infants in neonatal intensive care units (NICU). In-line filtration is increasingly used in critically-ill infants but its benefits, by preventing micro-particle infusion in neonates, remain to be demonstrated. In-line filters in the intravenous administration sets prevent the infusion of particles, which may reduce infectious complications.

This is a prospective, randomized, multi-center clinical trial for chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients referred for creation of a new arteriovenous fistula (AVF) in order to assess the safety and effectiveness of SelfWrap, a bioabsorbable perivascular wrap.

Objectives: To compare the safety and efficacy of nylon (polyamide) epidural catheter versus polyurethane epidural catheter in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery under continuous epidural anesthesia. Background: Continuous epidural anesthesia is the most common anesthetic technique used in orthopedic surgery. However, the use of epidural catheters is associated with complications. The insertion of the catheter may be associated with intravascular or intrathecal placement, nerve root irritation, paresthesia, kinking, hematoma, or breakage during catheter removal. Patients and Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial; carried out on 60 patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery under continuous epidural anesthesia. Patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups; group N, using Nylon catheter, and group P, using Polyurethane catheter.

Randomized, double-blind clinical trial to compare the efficacy of catheter sealing with saline, compared to low-dose heparin. 3,450 patients hospitalized at the Hospital Residencia Sant Camil, in Catalonia (Spain), will be randomized to each branch of study. The primary outcome will be the percentage of catheters removed due to obstruction in each branch of study. As secondary outcomes, the number of catheter-associated phlebitis, catheter-associated bacetrihemia, extravasation, and catheter loss will be measured. For the primary outcome, a superiority analysis will be carried out in terms of the percentage of obstructed catheters in each branch of the study.

Patients at risk of significant intraoperative blood loss and/or potential hemodynamic instability often necessitate the placement of two or more central venous catheters, including large bore catheters. In tertiary hospitals, anesthesiologists frequently encounter patients undergoing major surgeries such as liver transplantation, lung transplantation, cardiac surgery, and vascular surgery, who require multiple central venous punctures as part of routine anesthetic management. However, most review and consensus articles do not directly address the utilization of multiple catheters in the same venous site, nor establish formal recommendations regarding this practice. The latest consensus on central venous access from the American Association of Anesthesiologists (ASA), published in 2012, briefly touches upon some aspects related to this practice but does not outline any contraindications. Thus, the investigators have identified a gap in evidence and robust prospective studies addressing the use of more than one catheter in the same site for central venous access. This lacuna underscores the importance of conducting a controlled clinical study in our institutions to establish the efficacy and safety of this approach in the perioperative context. The present study aims to evaluate the incidence of mechanical complications (such as dysrhythmias, arterial puncture, hematoma, pneumothorax/hemothorax, insertion failure, or inadequate positioning) within the first 24 hours after double puncture of the internal jugular vein compared to puncture of two distinct central vessels, in patients undergoing multiple central venous accesses during major surgeries. This study will be designed as a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority, open, parallel clinical trial with two groups for patient allocation. Patients identified for multiple central venous accesses as part of preoperative anesthetic planning will be randomly allocated to either receive two central venous accesses in two separate sites (Group I or control group) or two concurrent central venous accesses in a single internal jugular vein (Group II or intervention group). Only adult patients classified as ASA I to IV (over 18 years old), scheduled for major surgery, will be eligible for inclusion.

Based on the previous research, this study intends to explore the outcome of trans-MC infusion of stimulant drugs when the MC tip is located in the subclavian vein/chest wall segment axillary vein, especially to analyze the relationship between drug dose, infusion days and catheter-related complications, so as to provide a basis for the clinical application of MC infusion stimulant drugs, provide evidence for the revision of infusion practice guidelines, and ensure the safety of patients' infusion. Reduce the occurrence of adverse events, provide a basis for further expanding the clinical application scope of MC, reduce unnecessary peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) and central venous catheters (CVC) and other central venous catheters, and reduce medical costs.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of edoxaban in the prevention of tumor catheter-related thrombosis (CVC/PICC) in high-risk patients