Intraosseous vascular access using the EZ-IO can be safely maintained in the adult proximal humerus and proximal tibia for up to 48 h: Report of a clinical study

Abstract

Background:

Historically, intraosseous (IO) vascular access devices cleared to market by the US FDA have been restricted to 24-h use. An observational study was conducted to determine the safety of IO access for a period up to 48 h in adult volunteers.

Methods:

A 2-arm randomized, stratified, parallel assignment, prospective interventional study was conducted at ICON Early Phase Services in San Antonio, Texas, United States. Study subjects were adult volunteers who were healthy or with a history of mild to moderate renal disease and/or controlled diabetes. Subjects were randomized to receive IO access (Arrow EZ-IO Vascular Access System, Teleflex Medical Incorporated, Morrisville, NC, USA) in the proximal humerus or the proximal tibia and maintain the indwelling catheter for 48 h. Subjects were monitored for the entire dwell time. A culture specimen was drawn from the indwelling catheter tip before removal and insertion site x-rays were taken.

Results:

121 subjects were randomized: 79 healthy, 39 with diabetes, and three with diabetes and renal insufficiency. The mean catheter dwell time was 48.0 ± 0.2 h. Overall first attempt success rate was 98.4%. Infusion pain was the most commonly reported adverse event. There were no serious complications or unanticipated adverse events.

Conclusions:

This is the first known study examining the safety of IO access over a 48-h dwell time. The study corroborates the literature findings, demonstrates device safety, and provides evidence supporting the extended indication for a dwell time to 48 h in adult patients. IO placement and infusion best practices/guidelines were confirmed or established.

Keywords

IO access intraosseous vascular access EZ-IO IO catheter IO needle dwell time

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Drinker

Lund

CC.

The circulation in mammalian bone marrow. Am J Physiol 1922; 62: 1–92.

Heinild

Sondergaard

Tudvad

Bone marrow infusion in childhood: experiences from a thousand infusions. J Pediatr 1947; 30: 400–412.

Tocantins

O’Neill

Jones

Infusion of blood and other fluids via the bone marrow: application in pediatrics. JAMA 1941; 117: 1229–1234.

Doud

Tysell

JE.

Massive intramedullary infusions. JAMA 1924;120:1212–1213.

Orlowski

JP.

My kingdom for an intravenous line, editorial. Am J Dis Children 1984; 138: 803.

Berg

RA.

Emergency infusion of catecholamines into bone marrow. Am J Dis Children 1984; 138: 810–811.

Turkel

Intraosseous infusions. Am J Dis Children 1983; 137: 706.

Hoskins

Nascimento

Espana

, et al. Pharmacokinetics of intraosseous drug delivery during CPR. Shock 2005; 23: 35.

Hoskins

Kramer

Stephens

, et al. Efficacy of epinephrine delivery via the intraosseous humeral head route during CPR. Circulation 2006; 114: 1204.

10.

Rosetti

Thompson

Miller

, et al. Intraosseous infusion: an alternative route of pediatric intravascular access. Ann Emerg Med 1985; 14: 885–888.

11.

Smith

Davis

Bouamra

, et al. The utilisation of intraosseous infusion in the resuscitation of paediatric major trauma patients. Injury 2005; 36: 1034–1038.

12.

Rogers

Fox

Miller

, et al. Safety of intraosseous vascular access in the 21st century. J Vascr Access 2012;13:19A

13.

Government of Canada. Active device name search results. From Health Canada. Licence No.: 78909. Licence name: EZ-IO Intraosseous Infusion System – Needle Sets. https://health-products.canada.ca/mdall-limh/information.do?deviceId_idInstrument=597967&deviceName_nomInstrument=EZ-IO+NEEDLE+%2B+STABILIZER+KIT&lang=eng&licenceId=78909. Accessed 11 October 2020.

14.

U.S. Food & Drug Administration. 510(k) Premarket Notification. 510(k) Number K180395. Device Name EZ-IO Intraosseous Vascular Access System, https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm?ID=K180395 (accessed 11 October 2020).

15.

Teleflex Incorporated. 2017 the science and fundamentals of intraosseous vascular access including frequently asked questions, Wayne, PA, MC-003266 2017

16.

American Diabetes Association: Standards of medical care in diabetes—2014. Diabetes Care 2014; 37: S14–S80

17.

Your A1c results: what do they mean? http://www.clinicaldiabetesjournals.org/content/diaclin/24/1/9.full.pdf (accessed October 21, 2014).

18.

Davidoff

Fowler

Gordon

, et al. Clinical evaluation of a novel intraosseous device: Prospective, 250-patient, multi-center trial. Journal of Emergency Medical Services 2005;30:S20-S23

19.

Miller

Guimond

Hostler

, et al. Feasibility of sternal intraosseous access by emergency medical technician students. Prehospital Emerg Care 2005; 9: 73–78.

20.

Ben-Abraham

Gur

Vater

, et al. Intraosseous emergency access by physicians wearing full protective gear. Acad Emerg Med 2003; 10: 1407–1410.

21.

Neumar

Otto

Link

, et al. Adult advanced cardiovascular life support: 2010 American heart association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation 2010; 122: S729–S767.

22.

Fowler

Gallagher

Issacs

, et al. The role of intraosseous vascular access in the out-of-hospital environment (resource document to NAEMSP position statement). Prehospital Emerg Care 2007; 11: 63–66.

23.

American College of Emergency Physicians. Policy statement: alternative methods to vascular access in the emergency department, https://www.acep.org/globalassets/new-pdfs/policy-statements/alternative.methods.vascular.access.in.ed.pdf (accessed 14 August 2018).

24.

Fowler

Pierce

Nazeer

, et al. 1,199 case series: powered intraosseous insertion provides safe and effective vascular access for emergency patients. Ann Emerg Med 2008; 52: S152.

25.

Horton

Beamer

Powered intraosseous insertion provides safe and effective vascular access for pediatric emergency patients. Pediatr Emerg Care 2008; 24: 347–350.

26.

Wampler

Schwartz

Shumaker

, et al. Paramedics successfully perform humeral EZ-IO intraosseous access in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. Am J Emerg Med 2012; 30: 1095–1099.

27.

Lewis

Wright

Saving the critically injured trauma patient: a retrospective analysis of 1000 uses of intraosseous access. Emerg Med J 2015; 32: 463–467

28.

Ross

Mapp

Kharod

CU.

Time to epinephrine in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective analysis of intraosseous versus intravenous access. Ann Emerg Med 2016; 68: S61.

29.

Platt

Notterman

Winchester

Fungal osteomyelitis and sepsis from intraosseous infusion. Pediatr Emerg Care 1993; 9: 149–150.

30.

Rosovsky

FitzPatrick

Goldfarb

, et al. Bilateral osteomyelitis due to intraosseous infusion: Case report and review of the English-language literature. Pediatr Radiol 1994; 24: 72–73.

31.

Barron

Tran

Lamki

LM.

Scintigraphic findings of osteomyelitis after intraosseous infusion in a child. Clin Nucl Med 1994; 19:307–308.

32.

Stoll

Golej

Burda

, et al. Osteomyelitis at the injection site of adrenalin through an intraosseous needle in a 3-month-old infant. Resuscitation 2002; 53: 315–318.

33.

Dogan

Irmak

Harman

, et al. Tibial osteomyelitis following intraosseous infusion: a case report. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica 2004; 38: 357–360.

34.

Henson

Payan

Terk

MR.

Tibial subacute osteomyelitis with intraosseous abscess: an unusual complication of intraosseous infusion. Skeletal Radiol 2011; 40: 239–242.

35.

Claudet

Baunin

Laporte-Turpin

Long-term effects on tibial growth after intraosseous infusion: a prospective, radiographic analysis. Pediatr Emerg Care 2003; 19: 397–401.

36.

Paxton

JH.

Intraosseous vascular access: a review. Trauma 2012; 14: 195–232.

37.

Dolister

Miller

Borron

, et al. Intraosseous vascular access is safe, effective and costs less than central venous catheters for patients in the hospital setting. J Vasc Access 2013; 14: 216–224.

38.

Reades

Studneck

Garrett

, et al. Comparison of first-attempt success between tibial and humeral intraosseous insertions during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Prehospital Emerg Care 2011; 15: 278–281.

39.

Reades

Studnek

Vandeventer

, et al. Intraosseous versus intravenous vascular access during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Emerg Med 2011; 58: 509–516

40.

Greenstein

Koenig

Mayo

, et al. A serious adult intraosseous catheter complication and review of the literature. Crit Care Med 2016; 44: e904–e909.

41.

Bregenzer

Conen

Sakmann

, et al. Is routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters necessary? Arch Intern Med 1998; 158: 151–156.

42.

Ascoli

DeGuzman

Rowlands

Peripheral intravenous catheter complication rates between those indwelling >96 hours to those indwelling 72 – 96 hours: a retrospective correlational study. Int J Nurs 2012; 1: 7–12.

43.

Avelar

Peterlini

Pedreira

ML.

Ultrasonography-guided peripheral intravenous access in children: a randomized controlled trial. J Infusion Nurs 2015; 38: 320–327.

44.

Helm

Klausner

Klemperer

, et al. Accepted but unacceptable: peripheral IV catheter failure. J Infusion Nurs 2015; 38: 189–203.

45.

Leidel

Kirchoff

Bogner

, et al. Is the intraosseous access route fast and efficacious compared to conventional central venous catheterization in adult patients under resuscitation in the emergency department? A prospective observational pilot study. Patient Saf Surg 2009; 3: 24.

46.

Silberzweig

Sacks

Khorsandi

, et al. Society of interventional radiology: reporting standards for central venous access. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003; 14: S443–S452.

47.

Zimlichman

Henderson

Tamir

, et al. Health care-associated infections: a meta-analysis of costs and financial impact on the US health care system. J Am Med Assoc Internal Med 2013; 173: 2039–2046.

48.

Philbeck

Puga

Montez

, et al. Incidence of CLABSI improved; intraosseous access can facilitate further improvement: an update of Dolister et al (2012) [Abstract]. The Association for Vascular Access 2014 Annual Scientific Meeting, September 7–10, 2014; National Harbor, MD.