Routine Catheter Lock Solutions in Pediatric Cancer Care: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Heparin vs Saline.

BACKGROUND:Central venous access devices (CVADs) are integral to cancer care provision. Despite the high prevalence of CVAD complications in children with cancer, preventative strategies are understudied. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to assess study feasibility, occlusive events, thrombolytic use, adverse events, and direct costs of catheter lock solutions. METHODS:A single-center, parallel-group, pilot randomized controlled trial was undertaken at a tertiary-referral pediatric hospital in Australia. Children 18 years or younger with an oncological or malignant hematological condition and a CVAD were eligible. Participants were 1:1 randomized to (1) normal or (2) heparinized (10-100 U/mL; CVAD-type dependent) saline lock solutions. RESULTS:Of 217 children assessed for eligibility, 61 were recruited and randomized to normal (n = 30; 3850 CVAD days) or heparinized (n = 31; 4036 CVAD days) saline. Eligibility (52%) and recruitment (54%) feasibility targets were not met. Protocol adherence was high (95% assessments), with no attrition. Parent/clinician satisfaction of interventions was high (median, 10/10 clinicians/parents). Complete CVAD occlusion occurred in heparin only (n = 2, 6.7% CVADs; incidence rate [IR], 0.49/1000 CVAD days [0.06-1.78]). Central venous access device partial occlusion was detected in 23.3% of CVADs in heparin (n = 7; IR, 2.73/1000 CVAD days [1.36-4.87]) and 13.8% of CVADs in normal saline (n = 4; IR, 2.59/1000 CVAD days [1.24-4.77]). Thrombolytic agents were used in 16.7% heparin (5 CVADs) and 3.5% normal saline (1 CVAD). Adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION:Multisite randomized controlled trials examining CVAD locks are safe, but strategies and resources to increase recruitment and eligibility are required. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:Both routine CVAD lock solutions seem safe but may not prevent all forms of CVAD-associated harm.