Bard PowerPICC Solo2 vs Cook Turbo-Ject: A Tale of Two PICCs

Abstract

Purpose To compare the complications experienced for 2 different brands of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC), Cook Turbo-Ject and the Bard PowerPICC Solo2. The rationale for this project revolved around concern that one of the PICCS in question had high rates of complications. Methods A prospective clinical trial was conducted after obtaining approval from the University of Saskatchewan Human Research Ethics Committee. All PICCs were implanted at the Royal University Hospital Medical Imaging Department by an interventional radiologist. Patient randomization was achieved by alternating the brand of PICC implanted in sequential patients. All the subjects were inpatients from a single surgical ward. Patients were excluded from the study if they had a known uncorrected coagulopathy, or if they were being treated for venous thrombosis. This project was financially supported by the Summer Student Research Fund, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan. Results A total of 53 PICCs (25 Bard and 28 Cook) were inserted over the study period. The mean PICC dwell time was 23.3 days for both the Bard and Cook PICCs, respectively. No statistically significant differences were detected in study group demographics, technical placement of the PICCs, or in the complications encountered. Discussion Both the Cook Turbo-Ject and the Bard PowerPicc Solo2 PICCs provided acceptable venous access for a wide variety of clinical indications.