Midline Failures: A Comparison Between a Hydrophilic Biomaterial and Thermoplastic Polyurethane

Midline Failures: A Comparative, Retrospective Chart Review

Status

Completed

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT04911842

Enrollment

205

Registered

2021-06-03

Start date

2021-05-20

Completion date

2022-01-18

Last updated

2023-02-02

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Midline Catheter

Brief summary

Retrospective chart review to evaluate and compare the rate of failures between midlines made from different materials

Interventions

DEVICEHydroMID

Hydrophilic biomaterial

DEVICETPU

Thermoplastic polyurethane

Study design

Observational model

CASE_CONTROL

Time perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Healthy volunteers

Inclusion criteria

* Subjects who have been inserted with the HydroMID by the vascular access group * Subjects who have been inserted with a competitor 4 Fr single lumen by the vascular access team

Exclusion criteria

* Any off-label use (PICC lines cut to be midlines for any manufacturer)

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
The primary objective of this chart review is to evaluate the rates of failure of midlines made from different materials.	retrospective review- March 2021 through May 2021

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
To compare the proportion of times the midline was used to successfully complete prescribed length.	retrospective review- March 2021 through May 2021

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026