![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Background: The Groshong catheter (GC) is considered to have a lower risk of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection (CVC-RBSI) than conventional catheters because of its valve system (closed-end) for preventing blood reflux. However, few studies have compared the GC with conventional (open-end) catheters in terms of catheter-related complications. Purpose: To compare the incidence of catheter-related complications including CVC-RBSI between the GC and the Argyle catheter (AC). Methods: The GC and the AC were inserted in the same way from the internal jugular vein. Catheter-related complications were evaluated from the database retrospectively. Results: Two hundred seventy GCs were inserted in 123 patients, and 251 ACs were inserted in 135 patients. There were no significant differences in patient background factors between GC and AC use, except for the following two parameters. Use of GC was associated with a longer catheter insertion length and a younger patient age. Univariate analysis revealed that neither type of catheter reduced the incidence of CVC-RBSI. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log rank test revealed no significant difference between the GC and the AC in the period from insertion to development of complications. Conclusions: The GC has no superiority over the conventional AC for preventing CVC-RBSI.