Comparison on clinical efficacy and adverse reactions between TPICC and ultrasound-guided PICC for advanced tumors: A retrospective study

Comparing the differences in efficacy and adverse reactions on the application between tunnel peripherally inserted central catheter (TPICC) and ultrasound-guided peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) in patients with advanced tumors. A retrospective investigation was conducted to collect treatment data. We randomly selected 200 patients with advanced tumors who were admitted to our hospital from January 2020 to January 2022 as the research subjects. The observation group consisted of 100 cases of tunnel PICC catheterization, while the control group consisted of 100 cases of PICC catheterization. We observed and compared the catheterization time, PICC puncture success rate, intraoperative blood loss, pain degree, comfort level, and postoperative complication rate between the 2 groups. Compared with the control group, there was no significant difference at the distribution of PICC indwelling time in the observation group, and the difference was not statistically significant (P > .05). The success rate on PICC puncture in the observation group was higher than that on the control group (P < .05). Intraoperative bleeding volume and numerical rating scale (NRS) of the observation group were lower than those of the control group (P < .05). At 1 month postoperatively, comfort ratings in the observation group and the control group were lower than those of their same groups at 1 week postoperatively (P < .05); At 1 week and 1 month postoperatively, comfort rating in the observation group were lower than that in the control group (P < .05). The incidence of postoperative complication in the observation group was lower than that in the control group (P < .05). TPICC improves the success rate on puncture and the post-catheterization comfort, it reduces NRS and the risks on complications, which owns high safety.