Which statement is a typical indication for a central venous catheter instead of a peripheral IV?

• A. Long-term therapy, vesicant drugs, high-osmolality or TPN, or need for central venous pressure monitoring
• B. Short-term dehydration is best via peripheral IV
• C. Peripheral IV is better for vesicant drugs
• D. Central line is never used for TPN

Answer: (C)

The main idea is when central venous access is chosen to manage drugs and therapy that either require safer administration or long-term access. A central venous catheter is typically indicated when you expect to need ongoing or frequent therapy, or when the medicines or solutions are not suitable for peripheral veins.

Vesicant drugs, which can cause tissue damage if they leak out of a vein, are better delivered through a central line. This reduces the risk of severe injury from extravasation because central veins allow better dilution and safer administration compared with peripheral veins. Likewise, high-osmolality or hypertonic solutions like total parenteral nutrition (TPN) are better given through a central line. Peripheral veins can become irritated or damaged by these substances over time, so central access minimizes those problems. Central lines also enable central venous pressure monitoring when that information is needed.

Peripheral IVs are appropriate for short-term, uncomplicated therapy with non-irritating medications. The statement that a peripheral IV is better for vesicant drugs isn’t accurate because the risk of tissue injury is greater with peripheral administration. And central lines are commonly used for TPN, not never used for it.