• PICC, port, or something else?

    Posted by jenny-livingston on October 6, 2020 at 1:35 pm

    As many of us can attest, people with CF are not strangers to IV therapy. PICCs and ports are probably the most common vascular access devised used in the CF community, but there are others as well (central lines, peripheral IVs, etc.) When it comes to choosing which method works best, things like the duration and frequency of treatment is considered, as well as a person’s tolerance for certain procedures/devices.

    I have a pretty traumatic history with PICC lines. The very first PICC  I got was placed bedside with no sedation. It took over 2 hours and a total of 4 attempts to get it placed correctly. After that, I had several more scarring (emotionally and physically) experiences. Eventually, it was suggested that I get my line placed in Interventional Radiology under IV sedation. This was a total game changer! PICC placements were much easier then, but I still had a great deal of procedural anxiety.

    In 2011 (I think?) I got a port, which I strongly preferred over PICCs. It was so convenient to have, but unfortunately didn’t last long. Just a year and a half later, my port was removed because it had thrown multiple blood clots into my lungs. Since then, I’ve had 4 PICC-associated (DVT) blood clots, so we’ve learned that I need to be on anticoagulation therapy anytime I have a line in.

    I can count 22 scars from PICC lines, and I’m sure there are more. My veins are so scarred that we’ve began questioning, “what’s next?” When it’s no longer possible to place a PICC, what will our next course of action be?

    What is our preferred method of vascular access for IV therapy? Are you team PICC or team port? Have you had issues with PICCs or ports? I’d love to know about your experiences with these things!


    jenny-livingston replied 3 years, 6 months ago 0 Member · 0 Replies
  • 0 Replies

Sorry, there were no replies found.

Log in to reply.