Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 25, 2026
Picoinjection of Microfluidic Drops Without Metal Electrodes
Published on: April 18, 2014
Maximal flow rates possible during power injection through currently available PICCs: an in vitro study
Ari I Salis1, Anthony Eclavea, Matthew S Johnson
1Department of Radiology, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. asalis@americanradiology.com
Purpose:
Currently available 4-F and 5-F peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) were investigated to evaluate their possible application for contrast medium injection using power injectors. The study was performed using an in vitro model to demonstrate the feasibility of using PICCs for contrast-enhanced diagnostic studies.
Materials And Methods:
An evaluation of 24 catheter versions consisting of 4-F single-lumen and 5-F dual-lumen PICCs from 13 different manufacturers was conducted. Six of the catheter types were silicone and 18 catheter types were polyurethane. Ten catheters of each type were evaluated with five at full length and five trimmed to 40 cm. With use of a silicone-based simulated SVC model, the catheters were infused with 50 mL of intravenous contrast medium at each flow rate increment. Catheters were tested at increasing flow rates from 0.5 to 5 mL/sec in 0.5-mL/sec increments using a Percupump CT injector. Catheters that failed to rupture were then infused at 1-mL/sec increments at flow rates from 5 to 17 mL/sec using a MedRad Mark V power injector. Tolerated and bursting pressures were recorded as well as the location of the catheter rupture.
Results:
Polyurethane catheters ruptured at flow rates between 4 and 15.4 mL/sec, with one catheter not rupturing at the maximal flow rate (17 mL/sec). Silicone catheters ruptured at flow rates between 0.5 to 3.5 mL/sec. Average rupture locations by type and length were at the extension leg/hub connection area on five of the PICCs, on the extension legs on 21 of the PICCs, on the catheter/hub connection on four PICCs, and on the proximal catheter on 16 of the PICCs.
Conclusion:
The low burst rates at which all silicone catheters ruptured suggest that those catheters are not able to withstand typical flow rates used for CT arteriography. Conversely, although there is a wide range of discrepancy in the polyurethane catheter burst pressures, many polyurethane catheters can tolerate relatively high flow rates without rupture. This suggests that they may be safely used for CT arteriography with appropriate precautions and protocols in place.
