Cochrane · systematic review · CD010996
Normal saline (0.9% sodium chloride) versus heparin intermittent flushing for the prevention of occlusion in long‐term central venous catheters in infants and children
Bradford, NK, Edwards, RM, Chan, RJ · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
3
current version
GRADE rated
3
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 33.3%Low 1 · 33.3%Moderate 1 · 33.3%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Show all 2 versionsDoes normal saline flushing in long‐term central venous catheters (CVC) prevent occlusion compared to heparin flushing in infants and children?
Population: infants and children with a long‐term CVC
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
CVC occlusion rate per 1000 catheter days: ability to infuse solution through CVC Does normal saline flushing in long‐term central venous catheters (CVC) prevent occlusion vs heparin flushing | Rate ratio 0.75 [0.1, 5.51] | 2 studies · 229 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
CVC‐associated blood stream infection rate per 1000 catheter days: incidence of positive blood culture Does normal saline flushing in long‐term central venous catheters (CVC) prevent occlusion vs heparin flushing | Rate ratio 1.48 [0.24, 9.37] | 2 studies · 231 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Duration of CVC placement (days) Does normal saline flushing in long‐term central venous catheters (CVC) prevent occlusion vs heparin flushing | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 203 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |