AzTrials
AzTrials

Oncology, MedicalPhase 4NCT00994136

Safety of Catheter Lock With or Without Heparin in Implanted Central Venous Catheters

A Phase 4 study testing normal saline in people with Oncology, Medical and Hematologic Disease, run by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Long-term central venous access devices are considered as safe for the administration of medication as chemotherapy, but are also used for blood sampling. For years these catheters have been locked with a heparin solution in order to avoid occlusion. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 1 year and older
Conditions the study is for
Oncology, Medical, Hematologic Disease
What is being tested?
normal saline
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
1,100 participants
Where
1 siteBelgium
Study dates
Jan 2009to Jun 2011
Phase
Phase 4
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 1 year and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Oncology and hematology patients
  • Life expectancy of minimum of 180 days

Who cannot join

  • second or femoral long-term central venous access device
  • known allergy to heparin (HIT)
  • coagulation disorders(INR >2, Blood platelets > 1,000,000/mm3)
  • therapeutic intravenous heparin administration

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Belgium1 site

  • Universitaire Ziekenhuizen Leuven

    Leuven, Vlaams-Brabant, 3000

Other trials in Belgium

About this study

Official title: Locking of Totally Implanted Venous Access Devices and Tunneled Catheters With or Without Heparin: a Randomised Open-labeled Controlled Trial

Long-term central venous access devices are considered as safe for the administration of medication as chemotherapy, but are also used for blood sampling. For years these catheters have been locked with a heparin solution in order to avoid occlusion. However, no scientific evidence supports heparin locking when the device is not in use. Advanced technology as needleless caps and valved catheters and port reservoirs confirms this trend to use 'saline only' for locking these devices. Therefore the investigators hypothesize is that there will be no difference in proportion of occlusions and catheter related bacteremia in long-term venous access devices locked with 'saline only' versus with heparin.

Being tested
normal saline
Keywords
Catheters, indwelling, Catheterization, Central Venous, Withdrawal occlusion, Heparin lock
Medical subject headings
Neoplasms, Hematologic Diseases

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • normal salineDrug

    Ten milliliters of normal saline will be injected at the end of the intravenous therapy. Injection is performed with the start/stop method and with the positive pressure technique (clamping the catheter while injecting the last milliliters of normal saline)

Study groups in NCT00994136
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Normal salineExperimentalIn the intervention group the use of heparin as locking solution in the catheter lumen (or lumina) when the catheter is not longer in use is omitted. Catheters are locked under positive pressure with normal saline in stead injecting an extra volume of heparinised saline (100IU/ml).
Receives: Drug: normal saline
Heparin lockNo interventionNot described
Receives: Drug: normal saline

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Withdrawal occlusion

    Measured: within180 days

Secondary outcomes (2)

  1. all catheter-related bacteremia

    Measured: within 180 days

  2. Incidence of functional problems other than withdrawal occlusion

    Measured: within 180 days

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted14 Oct 2009 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2009
  3. Primary completionJun 2011
  4. Study completionJun 2011

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
1,100 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00994136
Sponsor's protocol ID
SM008
Status last verified
Jun 2011
First submitted
13 Oct 2009
Last updated
9 Jun 2011
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Stephens LC, Haire WD, Tarantolo S, Reed E, Schmit-Pokorny K, Kessinger A, Klein R. Normal saline versus heparin flush for maintaining central venous catheter patency during apheresis collection of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC). Transfus Sci. 1997 Jun;18(2):187-93. doi: 10.1016/s0955-3886(97)00008-8.

    PubMed 10174683

  • Kadidal VV, Mayo DJ, Horne MK. Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) due to heparin flushes: a report of three cases. J Intern Med. 1999 Sep;246(3):325-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2796.1999.00527.x.

    PubMed 10476001

  • Rama BN, Haake RE, Bander SJ, Ghasem-Zadeh A, Gorla C. Heparin-flush associated thrombocytopenia--induced hemorrhage: a case report. Nebr Med J. 1991 Dec;76(12):392-4.

    PubMed 1784321

  • Bazelly B, Lotz JP, Milleron B. [The maintenance of totally implantable perfusion sites]. Rev Pneumol Clin. 1994;50(1):43-4. No abstract available. French.

    PubMed 7973333

  • Randolph AG, Cook DJ, Gonzales CA, Andrew M. Benefit of heparin in peripheral venous and arterial catheters: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 1998 Mar 28;316(7136):969-75. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7136.969.

    PubMed 9550955

  • Theard JL, Robard S. [Outcome of usage protocols on implantable devices]. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 1995;14(6):534-5. doi: 10.1016/s0750-7658(05)80501-5. No abstract available. French.

    PubMed 8745984

  • Smith S, Dawson S, Hennessey R, Andrew M. Maintenance of the patency of indwelling central venous catheters: is heparin necessary? Am J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 1991 Summer;13(2):141-3. doi: 10.1097/00043426-199122000-00005.

    PubMed 2069221

  • Brown-Smith JK, Stoner MH, Barley ZA. Tunneled catheter thrombosis: factors related to incidence. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1990 Jul-Aug;17(4):543-9.

    PubMed 2399167

  • Kelly C, Dumenko L, McGregor SE, McHutchion ME. A change in flushing protocols of central venous catheters. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1992 May;19(4):599-605.

    PubMed 1603675

  • Goossens GA, Verbeeck G, Moons P, Sermeus W, De Wever I, Stas M. Functional evaluation of conventional 'Celsite' venous ports versus 'Vortex' ports with a tangential outlet: a prospective randomised pilot study. Support Care Cancer. 2008 Dec;16(12):1367-74. doi: 10.1007/s00520-008-0436-y. Epub 2008 Apr 15.

    PubMed 18414904

  • McDiarmid S, Hamelin L, Huebsch LB. Leading change: Retrospective evaluation of a nurse-led initiative in vascular access options for autologous stem cell transplant recipients ranging from Hickman catheters to peripherally inserted central catheters. J Infus Nurs. 2006 Mar-Apr;29(2):81-8. doi: 10.1097/00129804-200603000-00005.

    PubMed 16569997

  • Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control. 2008 Jun;36(5):309-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2008.03.002. No abstract available.

    PubMed 18538699

  • Caers J, Fontaine C, Vinh-Hung V, De Mey J, Ponnet G, Oost C, Lamote J, De Greve J, Van Camp B, Lacor P. Catheter tip position as a risk factor for thrombosis associated with the use of subcutaneous infusion ports. Support Care Cancer. 2005 May;13(5):325-31. doi: 10.1007/s00520-004-0723-1. Epub 2004 Nov 5.

    PubMed 15538639

  • Petersen J, Delaney JH, Brakstad MT, Rowbotham RK, Bagley CM Jr. Silicone venous access devices positioned with their tips high in the superior vena cava are more likely to malfunction. Am J Surg. 1999 Jul;178(1):38-41. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(99)00124-5.

    PubMed 10456700

  • Brouns F, Schuermans A, Verhaegen J, De Wever I, Stas M. Infection assessment of totally implanted long-term venous access devices. J Vasc Access. 2006 Jan-Mar;7(1):24-8. doi: 10.1177/112972980600700105.

    PubMed 16596525

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 4 study testing normal saline in people with Oncology, Medical and Hematologic Disease, run by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Jun 2011. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Belgium. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Withdrawal occlusion (time frame: within180 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00994136, which also lists 18 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Jun 2011.

AzTrials uses cookies for analytics and advertising. You can accept or reject them; the site works either way. Privacy Policy.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in