Midline catheters (MCs) are widely used in clinical practice, and the insertion procedure may be associated with minor or major complications. Correct technique and adherence to specific strategies during placement are key factors that significantly affect complication rates and device longevity. This paper describes an insertion bundle—developed by the Italian Group of Long-Term Venous Access Devices (GAVeCeLT) and by the Italian Vascular Access Society (IVAS), and named “SIMiC” (Safe Insertion of Midline Catheters)—consisting of a few evidence-based strategies aimed at reducing all immediate, early, or late complications potentially associated with the insertion of MCs. The SIMiC bundle includes seven steps: (1) systematic ultrasound evaluation of the veins of the arms and the supra/infra-clavicular area; (2) choice of the most appropriate vein of the upper arm; (3) appropriate hand hygiene, proper skin antisepsis, and maximal barrier precautions; (4) ultrasound-guided venipuncture; (5) intra-procedural tip location, using infra/supraclavicular ultrasound scan; (6) sutureless securement, preferably using subcutaneous anchorage; (7) protection of the exit site with cyanoacrylate glue and semipermeable transparent membrane.
PittirutiMVan BoxtelTScoppettuoloG, et al. European recommendations on the proper indication and use of peripheral venous access devices (the ERPIUP consensus): a WoCoVA project. J Vasc Access2023; 24(1): 165–182.
2.
van RensMRvan der LeeRSpencerTR, et al. The NAVIGATE project: a GloVANet-WoCoVA position statement on the nomenclature for vascular access devices. J Vasc Access2025; 26(5): 1439–1446.
3.
AdamsDZLittleAVinsantC, et al. The midline catheter: a clinical review. J Emerg Med2016; 51(3): 252–258.
4.
WhiteDWollerSCStevensSM, et al. Comparative thrombosis risk of vascular access devices among critically ill medical patients. Thromb Res2018; 172: 54–60.
5.
FabianiASantoroMSansonG.The catheter-to-vein ratio at the tip level, not the catheter type, as a risk factor for a catheter failure. A retrospective comparative study of polyurethane midline and long peripheral catheters. Heart Lung2023; 60: 39–44.
6.
FabianiAAversanaNSantoroM, et al. Complications associated to midline- and long peripheral catheters in adults. Systematic review of literature and proposal for a standardized model for data collection. Thromb Res2024; 236: 117–126.
7.
ElliSPittirutiMPigozzoV, et al. Ultrasound-guided tip location of midline catheters. J Vasc Access2020; 21(5): 764–768.
8.
DeutschGBSathyanarayanaASinghN, et al. Ultrasound-guided placement of midline catheters in the surgical intensive care unit: a cost-effective proposal for timely central line removal. J Surg Res2014; 191(1): 1–5.
9.
DeVriesMLeeJHoffmanL.Infection free midline catheter implementation at a community hospital (2 years). Am J Infect Control2019; 47(9): 1118–1121.
10.
NickelBGorskiLKleidonT, et al. Infusion therapy standards of practice, 9th edition. J Infus Nurs2024; 47(1S Suppl 1): S1–S285.
11.
Carrero CaballeroMCMontealegre SanzMCubero PérezMA.Catéter venoso medial o midline (MVC) [Medial venous catheter or midline (MVC)]. Rev Enferm2014; 37(1): 36–41.
12.
SpencerTRMahoneyKJ.Reducing catheter-related thrombosis using a risk reduction tool centered on catheter to vessel ratio. J Thromb Thrombolysis2017; 44(4): 427–434.
13.
PittirutiMHamiltonHBiffiR, et al. ESPEN Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition: central venous catheters (access, care, diagnosis and therapy of complications). Clin Nutr2009; 28(4): 365–377.
14.
LampertiMBiasucciDGDismaN, et al. European Society of Anaesthesiology guidelines on peri-operative use of ultrasound-guided for vascular access (PERSEUS vascular access). Eur J Anaesthesiol2020; 37(5): 344–376. Erratum in: Eur J Anaesthesiol 2020; 37(7): 623.
15.
LampertiMBodenhamARPittirutiM, et al. International evidence-based recommendations on ultrasound-guided vascular access. Intensive Care Med2012; 38(7): 1105–1117.
16.
MoureauNLampertiMKellyLJ, et al. Evidence-based consensus on the insertion of central venous access devices: definition of minimal requirements for training. Br J Anaesth2013; 110(3): 347–356.
17.
JohnstonAJSimpsonMJMcCormackV, et al. Association of Anaesthetists guidelines: safe vascular access 2025. Anaesthesia2025; 80(11): 1381–1396.
18.
ElliSCavalliSFantiniV, et al. Safety and complications associated with tunneling and pseudotunneling techniques during PICC and Midline insertion. J Vasc Access2025; 26(5): 1582–1587.
19.
FabianiADreasLSansonG.Tunnelling a midline catheter: when the traffic light shifts from yellow to green. J Vasc Access2018; 19(6): 667–671.
20.
EmoliACappuccioSMarcheB, et al. Il protocollo ‘ISP’ (Inserzione Sicura dei PICC): un “bundle” di otto raccomandazioni per minimizzare le complicanze legate all’impianto dei cateteri centrali ad inserimento periferico (PICC) [The ISP (Safe Insertion of PICCs) protocol: a bundle of 8 recommendations to minimize the complications related to the peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC)]. Assist Inferm Ric2014; 33(2): 82–89.
21.
BresciaFPittirutiMSpencerTR, et al. The SIP protocol update: eight strategies, incorporating Rapid Peripheral Vein Assessment (RaPeVA), to minimize complications associated with peripherally inserted central catheter insertion. J Vasc Access2024; 25(1): 5–13.
22.
BresciaFPittirutiMOstroffM, et al. The SIC protocol: a seven-step strategy to minimize complications potentially related to the insertion of centrally inserted central catheters. J Vasc Access2023; 24(2): 185–190.
23.
BresciaFPittirutiMOstroffM, et al. The SIF protocol: a seven-step strategy to minimize complications potentially related to the insertion of femorally inserted central catheters. J Vasc Access2023; 24(4): 527–534.
24.
BresciaFAnnettaMGPinelliF, et al. A GAVeCeLT bundle for PICC-port insertion: the SIP-Port protocol. J Vasc Access2024; 25(6): 1713–1720.
25.
BresciaFAnnettaMGPinelliF, et al. A GAVeCeLT bundle for chest-port insertion: the SIC-Port protocol. J Vasc Access. Epub ahead of print 12 November 2025. DOI: 10.1177/11297298251375833.
26.
BartoliAGallieniMCogliatiC, et al. A decision-making algorithm proposal for PICCs and midlines insertion in patients with advanced kidney disease: a pilot study. J Vasc Access2024; 25(4): 1151–1157.
27.
SpencerTRPittirutiM.Rapid Central Vein Assessment (RaCeVA): a systematic, standardized approach for ultrasound assessment before central venous catheterization. J Vasc Access2019; 20(3): 239–249.
28.
NifongTPMcDevittTJ.The effect of catheter to vein ratio on blood flow rates in a simulated model of peripherally inserted central venous catheters. Chest2011; 140(1): 48–53.
DawsonR.PICC Zone Insertion Method™ (ZIM™): a systematic approach to determine the ideal insertion site for PICCs in the upper arm. J Assoc Vasc Access2011; 16(3): 156–165.
31.
OstroffMDMoureauNPittirutiM.Rapid Assessment of Vascular Exit Site and Tunneling Options (RAVESTO): a new decision tool in the management of the complex vascular access patients. J Vasc Access2023; 24(2): 311–317.
32.
AnnettaMGBertoglioSBiffiR, et al. Management of antithrombotic treatment and bleeding disorders in patients requiring venous access devices: a systematic review and a GAVeCeLT consensus statement. J Vasc Access2022; 23(4): 660–671.
33.
LovedayHPWilsonJAPrattRJ, et al. EPIC3: national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England. J Hosp Infect2014; 86 Suppl 1: S1–S70.
34.
O’GradyNPAlexanderMBurnsLA, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis2011; 52(9): e162–e193.
35.
BiasucciDGLa GrecaAScoppettuoloG, et al. Ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization: it is high time to use a correct terminology. Crit Care Med2015; 43(9): e394– e396.
36.
PinelliFPittirutiMVan BoxtelT, et al. GAVeCeLT-WoCoVA Consensus on subcutaneously anchored securement devices for the securement of venous catheters: current evidence and recommendations for future research. J Vasc Access2021; 22(5): 716–725.
37.
PittirutiMPinelliF ; GAVeCeLT Working Group for Vascular Access in COVID-19. Recommendations for the use of vascular access in the COVID-19 patients: an Italian perspective. Crit Care2020; 24(1): 269.
38.
BresciaFPittirutiMRoveredoL, et al. Subcutaneously anchored securement for peripherally inserted central catheters: immediate, early, and late complications. J Vasc Access2023; 24(1): 82–86.
39.
RoweMSArnoldKSpencerTR.Catheter securement impact on PICC-related CLABSI: a university hospital perspective. Am J Infect Control2020; 48(12): 1497–1500.
40.
ScoppettuoloGDolcettiLEmoliA, et al. Further benefits of cyanoacrylate glue for central venous catheterisation. Anaesthesia2015; 70(6): 758.
41.
GilardiEPianoAChelliniP, et al. Reduction of bacterial colonization at the exit site of peripherally inserted central catheters: a comparison between chlorhexidine-releasing sponge dressings and cyano-acrylate. J Vasc Access2021; 22(4): 597–601.
42.
D’AndreaVPezzaLBaroneG, et al. Use of cyanoacrylate glue for the sutureless securement of epicutaneo-caval catheters in neonates. J Vasc Access2022; 23(5): 801–804.
43.
van RensMNimeriAMASpencerTR, et al. Cyanoacrylate securement in neonatal PICC use: a 4-year observational study. Adv Neonatal Care2022; 22(3): 270–279.
44.
ZhangSGuidoARJonesRG, et al. Experimental study on the hemostatic effect of cyanoacrylate intended for catheter securement. J Vasc Access2019; 20(1): 79–86.
45.
Di PuccioFGiacomarroDMatteiL, et al. Experimental study on the chemico-physical interaction between a two-component cyanoacrylate glue and the material of PICCs. J Vasc Access2018; 19(1): 58–62.
46.
NicholsonJHillJ.Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive: a new tool for the vascular access toolbox. Br J Nurs2019; 28(19): S22–S28.
47.
WallerSCAndersonDWKaneBJ, et al. In vitro assessment of microbial barrier properties of cyanoacrylate tissue adhesives and pressure-sensitive adhesives. Surg Infect (Larchmt)2019; 20(6): 449–452.
48.
OstroffMZaukAChowdhuryS, et al. A retrospective analysis of the clinical effectiveness of subcutaneously tunneled femoral vein cannulations at the bedside: a low risk central venous access approach in the neonatal intensive care unit. J Vasc Access2021; 22(6): 926–934.
49.
RickardCMMarshNWebsterJ, et al. Dressings and securements for the prevention of peripheral intravenous catheter failure in adults (SAVE): a pragmatic, randomised controlled, superiority trial. Lancet2018; 392(10145): 419–430.
50.
BainbridgePBrowningPBernatchezSF, et al. Comparing test methods for moisture-vapor transmission rate (MVTR) for vascular access transparent semipermeable dressings. J Vasc Access2021; 24(5): 1000–1007.
51.
OstroffMAbergerKMoureauN.Case report: end of life care via a mid-thigh femoral midline catheter. J Vasc Access2023; 24(4): 809–812.
52.
GidaroASamartinFSalviE, et al. Midline peripheral catheters inserted in the superficial femoral vein at mid-thigh: wise choice in COVID-19 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients with helmet continuous positive airway pressure. J Vasc Access2023; 24(6): 1469–1476.
53.
BresciaFPittirutiMOstroffM, et al. Rapid Femoral Vein Assessment (RaFeVA): a systematic protocol for ultrasound evaluation of the veins of the lower limb, so to optimize the insertion of femorally inserted central catheters. J Vasc Access2021; 22(6): 863–872.
54.
AnnettaMGMarcheBDolcettiL, et al. Ultrasound-guided cannulation of the superficial femoral vein for central venous access. J Vasc Access2022; 23(4): 598–605.
55.
AnnettaMGElliSMarcheB, et al. Femoral venous access: state of the art and future perspectives. J Vasc Access2025; 26(2): 361–371.
56.
AnnettaMGElliSGidaroA, et al. Ultrasound-based tip navigation and tip location during placement of central venous access devices in adult patients: the ECHOTIP protocol revisited. J Vasc Access2026; 27(2): 409–415.
