Silicone and polyurethane tunneled infusion catheters: a comparison of durability and breakage rates.

PURPOSE To examine the overall durability and breakage rates of dual-lumen silicone catheters in comparison with power-injectable dual-lumen polyurethane catheters. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients who received a 10-F dual-lumen silicone catheter or 9.5-F dual-lumen polyurethane catheter between January 2002 and July 2009 were identified through a quality assurance database. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively. A total of 117 silicone and 94 polyurethane catheters were identified in 192 patients. Reasons for catheter placement and removal were recorded, as were cases of breakage and repairs. Catheter durability was compared; survival analysis was also performed. RESULTS Breakage occurred in nine of 117 silicone catheters (8%) and none of 94 polyurethane catheters (P = .005). Most catheters were placed for malignancy (162 of 211; 77%); nonmalignant indications such as total parenteral nutrition accounted for 49 out of 211 catheters (23%). The mean silicone catheter dwell time was 99 days (11,612 total catheter-days), and the mean polyurethane catheter dwell time was 78 days (7,362 total catheter-days). There was no significant difference in overall duration of function (ie, survival) between silicone and polyurethane catheters (P = .12). The infection rates were 3.6 per 1,000 catheter-days for silicone catheters and 3.5 per 1,000 catheter-days for polyurethane catheters (P value not significant). CONCLUSIONS There were fewer catheter fractures with the polyurethane catheter compared with the silicone catheter, although there was no difference in the total access site service interval for the two catheter types.