CI

At a glance

ClinicalIndex Comparison Record
N/ACompleted· 339 enrolled
Drug / intervention
Tapered PICC +1 moredevice
Likely dose
Not stated in record
Structured eligibility isn't available for this trial yet — see the full criteria in the Eligibility tab below.

Standardized by ClinicalIndex from the ClinicalTrials.gov record · verify against the source.

Search/NCT00728819
NCT00728819N/ACompleted
CompareCT.gov

Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) Thrombosis: Reverse Taper Versus Non-tapered Catheters

University of Pennsylvania·interventional·Posted Aug 6, 2008·Updated Apr 27, 2018

In Brief

A clinical study evaluating Tapered PICC and Non-tapered PICC for Venous Thrombosis. Completed, enrolled 339 participants across 1 site.

Detailed Summary

The purpose of this study is to compare two different marketed PICC (peripherally inserted central catheter) designs. Clotting rates, procedural bleeding and ease of catheter insertion will be compared. It is hypothesized that the non-tapered design has a lower clotting rate and is easier to place than the tapered design. Bleeding rates are expected to be about the same.

Study Details

Study Typeinterventional
Allocation--
Masking--
Primary Purpose--
ConditionsVenous Thrombosis
CountriesUnited States
Collaborators--

Timeline

N/ACompletedFinished
2009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024202520262027
First PostedAug 6, 2008
Enrollment StartAug 1, 2008
Primary CompletionJan 1, 2011
Study CompletionAug 1, 2011
TodayJul 2, 2026
Enrollment to primary: 2.4 yearsPosted 17.9 years ago

Interventions

Tapered PICCdevice

Standard peripheral central catheter placement in the Brachial, Basilic or Cephalic veins

Non-tapered PICCdevice

Standard peripheral central catheter placement in the Brachial, Basilic or Cephalic veins