Our In-Line IV Filters Are Capable of Retaining Particles
“Unfortunately, the particle issue remains mostly unseen; although many practitioners may feel they have never met a patient impacted by particles, the reality is that they have almost certainly never seen a patient who is not affected in some manner.”
Intensive care patients often get a high volume of IV infusions that may inject up to one million particles per day without IV in-line filters. Particles infused into the body may disrupt the microcirculation, and impaired microvascular flow in key organs may result in organ dysfunction in intensive care unit patients.
Our IV in-line filters have been demonstrated in laboratory and clinical tests to retain particles in a clinical setting, enhance patient outcomes, decrease duration of stay in the intensive care unit, and may have a favorable financial effect on the hospital’s income.
The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition notes in 2020 that “the adverse effects of particle infusion seem to be particularly severe in newborns, the critically unwell, and those with underlying tissue damage due to trauma, surgery, or sepsis.” The need for prolonged or vigorous intravenous treatment, which is typically required in patients receiving Parenteral Nutrition, also raises the risk of particle infusion-related adverse effects.”
Infusion Nursing Society’s 8th Edition of the Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice says in 2021: “Consider filtering of solutions and drugs to decrease particulate matter in critically sick patients that might induce thrombogenesis, reduced microcirculation, and modify immunological response.”
Particles Squeezed Through a Pall IV Filter
Particle contamination of IV solutions can occur from a variety of sources, including incomplete drug reconstitution, drug incompatibility reactions during IV therapy, conglomerates of parenteral nutrition components, glass from containers / ampoules, plastic containers, or infusion system components such as IV tubing, catheters, and rubber stoppers.
Particle Infusion and High-Risk Intensive Care Unit Patients
Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are considered a high-risk population for particle exposure linked with infusion treatment.
Patients in intensive care units get large amounts of medications and fluids.
In ICUs, drugs and fluids are mostly delivered intravenously.
Patients in intensive care units often need the administration of numerous medications through a restricted number of venous accesses and so face a greater risk of drug incompatibilities resulting in particle formation.
The Effects of Harmful Particles on Patients
Particles of any size have the ability to cause harm to the human body once they enter the circulatory system. The impact of infused particles is dependent on a variety of elements, including particle size, shape, quantity, composition, and electrical charge.
Infused particles may cause blood artery blockages, systemic hypercoagulability owing to coagulation system activation, microcirculation impairment, immunological modulation effects, and inflammatory responses.
Additionally, proteinaceous particles derived from therapeutic proteins, such as monoclonal antibody treatments, may induce immunogenicity and hypersensitivity.
The Toll That Harmful Particles Place on Patients
What is the dosage of particles administered into patients? The figures vary according to the ICU infusion regime’s configuration, the medications examined, the incidence of drug incompatibilities, and the particle sizes detected. Over the past several years, research efforts have quantified the number of particles that might be administered into patients. Subvisible particles are those with a diameter of less than 100 microns. The majority of particles found in infusion regimens, single medications, parenteral nutrition solutions, and drug containers are in the subvisible range. As a general rule, the smaller the particle size, the greater the number.
Our IV Filters Help ICU Patients Face Less Particle Burden
Two investigations conducted in simulated hospital settings established that IV in-line filters may retain particulates.
Perez et al. found that adding in-line filters to multidrug infusion lines used in pediatric critical care unit patients resulted in a considerable decrease in total particulate matter. After a 24-hour multidrug administration, the total number of particles was determined. According to the statistics in the table below, particle retention ranges between 99.9 and 98.2 percent, depending on the particle sizes recorded. This investigation used a Pall AEF1NTE filter.
Clinical Benefits of the IV Filter for ICU Patients
Since 2008, researchers and doctors have focused on the effect of particles, or the effect of particle-retaining IV in-line filters, on ICU patients. Our IV filters have been and continue to be a major contributor to this effort. Numerous investigations have shown the therapeutic utility of IV in-line filters.
Schaefer et al. shown in 2008 that particle infusion constitutes a significant danger to important tissue perfusion and that IV in-line filters prevent further reductions in postischemic functional capillary density. The findings of the animal research indicate that “in-line filters may have significant implications for patients who have previously had microvascular impairment in essential organs (i.e. posttraumatic shock, major surgery, sepsis).”
Several human clinical studies conducted over the past decade indicate that IV in-line filters benefit ICU patients by maintaining organ functioning, decreasing the incidence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), and decreasing postoperative phlebitis rates in surgical patients.
Economic Impact of Intravenous Filters
Two clinical investigations assessed the length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) and the overall length of stay in the hospital.
The table below summarizes data from a research conducted by Jack et al. on 807 pediatric patients. Pediatric intensive care unit patients who received IV in-line filters were able to depart the ICU substantially sooner than kids who did not get IV in-line filters.
The table below summarizes results from a research conducted by Schmitt et al. on 3215 adult patients. Adult ICU patients with IV in-line filters were much more likely to be discharged from the ICU and hospital than patients without IV in-line filters.
An investigation of the economic benefit of in-line filters in a German PICU indicated that a 50K € investment in in-line filters resulted in a 1.6 million € return on investment for the hospital.
Dr Michael Sasse, senior physician in charge of the PICU at Hannover Medical School (MHH), offered the following economic considerations at the 2018 EAHM (European Association of Hospital Managers) convention in Portugal:
“Less severe consequences result in the use of fewer medications such as antibiotics, a drop in organ replacement, a decrease in medical staff effort, and a decrease in diagnostic procedure expenses. Allowing patients to be released sooner also enhances the flexibility of ICU allocation and surgical capacity.”
Additionally, Van Lingen’s research assessed the expenditures associated with treating ill newborn babies during a typical eight-day stay. Along with a considerable reduction in serious clinical consequences, significant cost savings were reported.
Recommendations for IV Filtration in the United States of America
The Infusion Nurses Society (INS) and the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.) both endorse in-line filtration in light of laboratory and clinical trial data proving the advantages of IV in-line filters in critical care patients.
Concerning the use of IV filters, ASPEN stated in a 2020 position paper that “healthcare organizations that do not filter parenteral nutrition (PN) admixtures or Intravenous Lipid Emulsions (ILE) should reconsider their decision and weigh the small cost of filters against the increased morbidity and mortality that may result from not filtering ILE or PN.”