Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 5, 2025

The Supraclavicular Fossa Ultrasound View for Central Venous Catheter Placement and Catheter Change Over Guidewire
Published on: December 23, 2014
The risk of venous thromboembolism associated with midline catheters compared with peripherally inserted central
Huapeng Lu1,2, Qinling Yang1, Lili Yang1
1Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Background:
Both midline catheters (MCs) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) can cause venous thromboembolism (VTE), but the prevalence associated with each is controversial.
Objective:
To compare the risk of VTE between MCs and PICCs with a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Methods:
The Web of Science Core Collection, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, the Cochrane Library and ProQuest were searched from inception to January 2020. All studies comparing the risk of VTE between MCs and PICCs were included. Selected studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Downs and Black checklist. Two authors independently assessed the literature and extracted the data. Any different opinion was resolved through third-party consensus. Meta-analyses were conducted to generate estimates of VTE risk in patients with MCs versus PICCs, and publication bias was evaluated with RevMan 5.3.
Results:
A total of 86 studies were identified. Twelve studies were recruited, involving 40,871 patients. The prevalence of VTE with MCs and PICCs was 3.97% (310/7806) and 2.29% (758/33065), respectively. Meta-analysis showed that the prevalence of VTE with MCs was higher than that with PICCs (RR=1.53, 95% CI: 1.33-1.76, p < .00001). Subgroup analyses by age showed that the prevalence of VTE with MCs was higher than that with PICCs in the adult group (RR=1.75, 95% CI: 1.38-2.22, p < .00001), and higher than that with PICCs in the other subgroups (RR=1.42, 95% CI: 1.19-1.69, p = .0001). Subgroup analyses by nation showed that the prevalence of VTE with MCs was higher than that with PICCs (RR=1.50, 95% CI: 1.30-1.73, p < .00001) in US subgroup and higher than that with PICCs (RR=2.87, 95% CI: 1.24-6.65, p = .01) in the other nations. The sensitivity analysis shows that the results from this meta-analysis are robust and all studies have no significant publication bias.
Conclusions:
This study provides the first systematic assessment of the risk of VTE between MCs and PICCs. MCs are associated with a higher risk of VTE than PICCs in all patients and adults. The findings of this study have several important implications for future practice. However, the risk of VTE between MCs and PICCs in children is unclear.
Insights
Midline catheters (MCs) pose a higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared to peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) in adults. This systematic review and meta-analysis highlights the increased VTE prevalence associated with MCs, informing clinical practice.
Area of Science:
- Medical devices
- Vascular access
- Thromboembolism
Background:
- Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a known complication of both midline catheters (MCs) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs).
- The comparative prevalence of VTE between these two types of catheters remains controversial in existing literature.
Purpose of the Study:
- To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the risk of VTE associated with MCs versus PICCs.
- To provide a comprehensive assessment of VTE prevalence for each catheter type.
Main Methods:
- Systematic literature search across multiple databases (Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, ProQuest) up to January 2020.
- Inclusion of studies comparing VTE risk between MCs and PICCs, with methodological quality assessed using the Downs and Black checklist.
- Meta-analysis to estimate VTE risk and evaluate publication bias using RevMan 5.3.
Main Results:
- Twelve studies involving 40,871 patients were analyzed, revealing a VTE prevalence of 3.97% for MCs and 2.29% for PICCs.
- Meta-analysis indicated a significantly higher prevalence of VTE with MCs compared to PICCs (RR=1.53, p < .00001).
- Subgroup analyses confirmed higher VTE risk with MCs in adults and across different nations, with robust findings and no significant publication bias.
Conclusions:
- This study is the first systematic assessment comparing VTE risk between MCs and PICCs.
- Midline catheters are associated with a significantly higher risk of VTE than PICCs, particularly in adult populations.
- Further research is needed to clarify the VTE risk associated with these catheters in pediatric patients.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Venous Thrombosis II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Venous Thrombosis IV: Nursing Management
Venous Thrombosis I: Introduction
Parentral Nutrition: Centeral and Peripheral Parental Nutrition
PN can be administered through two primary routes:
1. Central Parenteral Nutrition (CPN):
CPN involves delivering a high concentration of nutrients through a large vein. This is typically achieved using a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) or,...
Cardiac Catheterization IV: Nursing Management

