This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

ROBERT J. SHULMAN, MD
Baylor College of Medicine Department of Pediatrics Section of Nutrition 6608 Fannin, Suite 601 Houston, TX 77030

Am J Dis Child. 1989;143(5):521.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

I am not certain of Dr Sussmane's meaning when he writes that the use of a peripherally inserted central catheter has certain advantages. I assume that he means advantages over traditional, surgically placed catheters, such as those used in our study. The two methods do not seem comparable for at least two reasons. First, surgically implanted catheters are intended for long-term therapy. The mean number of catheter-days in our patients was 10-fold greater than that in Dr Sussmane's series. Second, the youngest patient in Dr Sussmane's group was 7 years old, compared with a mean age of 2.5 years in the single-lumen group in our study. The percutaneous technique he describes is similar to that which we and others have reported for use in premature infants.^1,2 This technique certainly may facilitate short-term venous access. Nevertheless, I strongly urge that retrospective and, ideally, prospective, randomized studies be performed for the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?