The clinical stakes are considerable. Umbilical catheters provide direct access to the central circulation of a newborn in the first days of life, a period when peripheral veins are tiny, fragile, and often inadequate for the concentrated nutrition and vasoactive drugs that preterm and critically ill infants require. The umbilical vein offers a route to the inferior vena cava and the right atrium, while the umbilical arteries allow monitoring of blood gases and blood pressure and continuous infusion of medications. But the same anatomical shortcuts that make these devices so useful also make them dangerous when they are misplaced. A venous catheter that stops short of the inferior vena cava can deliver hypertonic fluid directly into the portal circulation of the liver, causing tissue damage, thrombosis, or even hepatic necrosis. An arterial catheter positioned too high or too low can compromise blood flow to the spinal cord, the intestines, or the lower limbs.

The new recommendation emphasizes that the risks are not hypothetical. Recent systematic reviews and meta-analysis cited by the working group document a substantial burden of adverse events associated with umbilical vascular catheters, including bloodstream infections, thrombosis of the portal venous system, hepatic injury from inadvertent infusion of parenteral nutrition into liver parenchyma, and catheter malposition. One retrospective study published in 2025 specifically examined the pursuit of zero central line-associated bloodstream infections in umbilical catheterization, underscoring that these infections are largely preventable with rigorous insertion and maintenance bundles. A risk prediction model developed by Australian researchers further highlights that adverse events are frequent enough, and predictable enough, to warrant systematic prevention strategies rather than case-by-case vigilance.

At the heart of the recommendation is a call for standardized protocols covering three distinct phases of catheter management: assessment before insertion, the insertion procedure itself, and post-insertion evaluation of catheter tip position. The authors argue that each phase contains critical decision points where deviation from best practice compounds risk. Before insertion, clinicians must assess whether an umbilical catheter is truly the most appropriate vascular access device for the infant’s expected needs and duration of therapy, drawing on structured decision-making tools such as the neonatal device-expert algorithm previously developed by members of the same group. The recommendation aligns with the nomenclature established by the Navigate project, a global position statement that created a common vocabulary for vascular access devices, in part because inconsistent terminology has historically made it difficult to compare evidence and practices across centers.

The insertion phase receives particularly detailed attention. The recommendation describes a technique in which the catheter is advanced under controlled conditions with attention to asepsis, pain management, and securement. Procedural pain in neonates is a recognized concern, and the authors point to established guidelines for procedural pain management in newborns as an integral component of any catheterization. Skin antisepsis is another technical focus. The document reviews the evidence comparing aqueous 2 percent chlorhexidine gluconate with 2 percent chlorhexidine gluconate in 70 percent isopropyl alcohol, noting recent studies in moderate and extremely preterm infants suggesting that the alcohol-based preparation is safe after the first week of life and may be associated with a reduced incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections. A randomized feasibility trial known as the Arctic trial, together with a Cochrane review of antiseptic solutions for central catheter insertion in neonates, informs this guidance, and national surveys of neonatal practice in Italy reveal how rapidly adoption of alcohol-based chlorhexidine has been spreading.

Perhaps the most consequential technical shift endorsed by the recommendation concerns how clinicians confirm that the catheter tip has reached its intended destination. For decades, the default method has been a plain chest and abdominal radiograph obtained after insertion, with the clinician estimating tip position relative to vertebral bodies and cardiac silhouette. The recommendation now champions ultrasound-based tip navigation and tip location, performed in real time during insertion. Structured protocols such as Neo-Echotip, developed for central venous access devices in neonates, allow the operator to watch the catheter advance and to verify the tip position immediately, adjusting depth before securing the device. Recent retrospective data indicate that real-time ultrasound tip location reduces both malposition and radiation exposure during umbilical venous catheter placement, since a correctly placed catheter on the first attempt eliminates the need for repeat radiographs and repositioning procedures.

The evidence base for ultrasound guidance has been accumulating steadily. Prospective studies have used ultrasound to track umbilical venous catheter migration in preterm infants over time, revealing that catheters move as the infant grows and as abdominal pressure changes, a phenomenon with direct implications for how often tip position should be rechecked. Other work has demonstrated that aligning the catheter with the umbilical vein and the ductus venosus under ultrasound guidance improves the likelihood of reaching the ideal central position. Comparative studies of low-lying versus centrally positioned umbilical venous catheters have found higher complication rates when the tip remains in the portal system, reinforcing the argument that precise, verified central placement should be the standard of care rather than an aspiration. An Italian expert consensus on tip location methods for central venous access devices, published in 2026, further consolidates the case for intracavitary electrocardiography and ultrasound as complementary or alternative tools to radiography.

Securement and maintenance form the third pillar of the recommendation. Even a perfectly positioned catheter can migrate, and radiographic assessments of catheter movement over time show that displacement is common in the days following insertion. The recommendation addresses this with guidance on securement techniques, including the use of cyanoacrylate glue, which was evaluated in a randomized controlled trial for umbilical venous catheter securement, and transparent semipermeable dressings, whose moisture vapor transmission properties have been the subject of comparative testing. The authors also draw on infection prevention frameworks, including the Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice, the Epic3 national guidelines from England, and the SHEA neonatal intensive care unit white paper series on preventing central line-associated bloodstream infections, to define how catheters should be handled, accessed, and monitored throughout their dwell time.

For umbilical arterial catheters specifically, the recommendation revisits a long-standing debate about optimal tip position, informed by the Cochrane review originally conducted by Keith Barrington, which compared high-lying catheters positioned above the diaphragm with low-lying catheters below the renal arteries. The working group also acknowledges innovative adaptations, such as the off-label use of peripherally inserted central catheters as umbilical arterial catheters reported in a clinical case series, reflecting the resourcefulness of neonatal teams when conventional devices are unavailable. The broader context for the recommendation is a series of structured insertion bundles developed by the same network, including the SIUVEC protocol for safe insertion of umbilical venous catheters and the SIECC protocol for epicutaneo-cava catheters, both of which were designed to minimize complications during placement and management, and a prospective study of a bundle for central venous catheterization in neonates and children covering more than 700 cases.

The authors, led by Fiammetta Piersigilli of Cliniques Saint Luc and the University of Louvain in Brussels and Robin van der Lee of Radboudumc Amalia Children’s Hospital in Nijmegen, stress that the recommendation is the product of a multidisciplinary consensus spanning neonatologists, nurses, anesthesiologists, and vascular access specialists across Europe, with contributions from the European Foundation for the Care of Newborn Infants and the Global Foundation for the Care of Newborn Infants. The work received no external funding, and the authors declare no competing interests. As the second installment in a ten-part series, the document signals a broader ambition: to bring the same rigor to every vascular access device in the neonatal unit that infection prevention campaigns brought to hand hygiene a generation ago. If the recommendation achieves its stated goals, the routine, verifiable, ultrasound-guided placement of umbilical catheters could become as standard in neonatal care as the devices themselves, turning one of intensive care’s most useful tools into a demonstrably safer one for the smallest patients.

Subject of Research: Standardized management of umbilical venous and arterial catheters in neonatal intensive care

Article Title: Management of umbilical venous and arterial catheter: Neonatal European Vascular Access Team- ESPR Recommendation 2

Article References: Management of umbilical venous and arterial catheter: Neonatal European Vascular Access Team- ESPR Recommendation 2. (n.d.). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-026-05465-8

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1038/s41390-026-05465-8

Keywords: umbilical venous catheter, umbilical arterial catheter, neonatal intensive care, NEVAT, ESPR, ultrasound tip location, catheter malposition, central line-associated bloodstream infection, chlorhexidine skin antisepsis, neonate, vascular access, clinical recommendation

The new document, published in the journal Pediatric Research, is the fifth in a series of ten recommendations developed jointly by the Neonatal European Vascular Access Team, known as NEVAT, and the Pediatric and Neonatal Vascular Access Special Interest Group of the European Society for Pediatric Research, or ESPR. Led by Matheus van Rens and Robin van der Lee of Radboud University Medical Center in the Netherlands, together with an international consortium of neonatologists, nurses, anesthetists, and vascular access experts spanning institutions from Brescia to Brussels, London to Sofia, the recommendation tackles a deceptively simple question: how should clinicians manage the humble peripheral intravenous cannula in a newborn? The answer, the authors argue, demands a complete shift in mindset, away from tradition and toward structured, individualized vascular access planning.

The scale of the problem is striking. Vascular access is, as the authors describe it, a pervasive facet of contemporary neonatal practice, yet it lacks standardization, and some common practices simply lack supporting evidence. Peripheral catheters in neonates fail at notoriously high rates, with complications such as infiltration, in which infused fluid leaks into surrounding tissue, and extravasation, in which vesicant medications escape the vein and can cause devastating skin and tissue injury. A multicenter observational study cited in the recommendation documented substantial complication rates in neonatal peripheral cannulation, and retrospective cohort work from the same Dutch group, including the ABBA project, which stands for Assess Better Before Access, has catalogued the device outcomes and modifiable risk factors that drive those failures. Each failed catheter means another painful puncture attempt, another delay in therapy, and another source of stress for fragile infants and their families.

What makes the new recommendation novel is its integration of three pillars: advanced visualization technology, standardized assessment protocols, and modern securement strategies. On the technology front, the authors highlight the growing role of near-infrared light devices, which project an image of subcutaneous veins onto the skin, making otherwise invisible vessels easier to target. Cross-sectional research in a level III neonatal intensive care unit evaluated the efficiency of such systems for peripheral cannulation, and a 2024 meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examined the effectiveness of near-infrared light devices for venous cannulation in children and adolescents. Ultrasound, too, features prominently, building on prior work that systematically mapped the diameter of deep veins in newborns and on international evidence-based recommendations for ultrasound-guided vascular access. The message is clear: in the smallest patients, seeing the target before you puncture it is no longer a luxury but a standard of care.

Equally important is the recommendation’s embrace of structured pre-procedural assessment. The document incorporates a protocol known as RaSuVA, short for Rapid Superficial Vein Assessment, a systematic pre-procedural evaluation of superficial veins designed to optimize venous catheterization in neonates. Rather than choosing an insertion site on the basis of convenience or habit, clinicians are encouraged to survey the available vasculature deliberately, matching the characteristics of the vein to the intended therapy and the expected duration of treatment. This individualized planning represents a philosophical departure from the one-size-fits-all approach that has historically dominated neonatal units, where the first accessible vein often won by default regardless of whether it was the right vessel for the job.

The recommendation also draws on the broader ERPIUP consensus, a European set of recommendations on the proper indication and use of peripheral venous access devices developed under the WOCOW project, as well as the ninth edition of the Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice, the most widely recognized reference framework in infusion nursing. By anchoring neonatal-specific guidance within these established international standards, the authors ensure that the care of a two-kilogram infant in Rotterdam or Rimini aligns with the same evidence base that governs adult vascular access worldwide, while respecting the unique anatomy, skin fragility, and developmental needs of newborns.

Securement and dressing strategies receive particularly detailed attention, and here the science has moved rapidly in recent years. Tissue adhesive, specifically octyl-butyl-cyanoacrylate glue, has emerged as a sutureless method of anchoring catheters, and retrospective observational studies in neonatal populations have evaluated its use for securing peripheral intravenous catheters. Related work has documented a decade of clinical experience with cyanoacrylate glue for venous access in a large university hospital, demonstrated its safety for securing epicutaneo-caval catheters in neonates, and, crucially, established safe and effective techniques for removing the adhesive without injuring fragile neonatal skin. The recommendation also weighs the properties of transparent semipermeable membranes, including their moisture-vapor transmission characteristics, against the documented risk of medical adhesive-related skin injuries in neonatal departments, a real concern given that the stratum corneum of a premature infant is thinner and more permeable than that of an adult.

Surveillance and early detection of complications form another pillar of the document. The authors cite research on the risks of peripheral intravenous therapy infiltration and extravasation, known by the acronym PIVIE, and on the potential for earlier notification of such events using novel sensor technology in a neonatal population. Complementary work has explored optical detection of infiltration during peripheral infusion in neonates, suggesting a future in which smart dressings and continuous monitoring could alert clinicians to a failing catheter before visible swelling appears. The recommendation also addresses the choice of catheter material and gauge, drawing on studies of how peripheral catheter type and material affect therapy failure in neonates, and considers the emerging role of long peripheral catheters as a middle ground between short peripheral cannulas and epicutaneous-caval central catheters.

Infection prevention and skin antisepsis round out the technical scope. The recommendation situates peripheral access within the broader context of strategies to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections in acute-care hospitals and practical neonatal intensive care approaches to the same problem, while acknowledging the nuances of antiseptic selection in newborns. Research comparing 2 percent chlorhexidine gluconate in 70 percent isopropyl alcohol for skin disinfection during catheter insertion in premature neonates, alongside a Cochrane systematic review of antiseptic solutions for neonatal central catheter insertion, underscores both the promise and the caution required, since some antiseptic agents carry toxicity concerns in the smallest infants. Even family-centered care makes an appearance: a Dutch case report describes maintaining parent-infant skin-to-skin contact during peripheral catheter insertion, a reminder that technical excellence and developmental care need not be adversaries.

By shifting from habit-driven decisions to individualized vascular access planning, the ESPR and NEVAT consortium has set what its members describe as a new standard for safer, more effective neonatal intravenous therapy. The work was not externally funded, and the authors declare no competing interests, lending weight to its conclusions. For clinicians, the practical takeaways are concrete: assess the veins systematically before every insertion, use visualization technology where available, secure catheters with modern adhesives and dressings chosen for neonatal skin, monitor vigilantly for infiltration, and remove or replace devices based on clinical indication rather than arbitrary routine. For parents, the promise is subtler but no less profound: fewer failed attempts, fewer painful procedures, and a lower risk of the tissue injuries that can scar a child for life. In a field where the patients cannot speak and their veins are measured in fractions of a millimeter, that quiet revolution may prove to be one of the most consequential advances in neonatal care this decade.

Subject of Research: Evidence-based management of peripheral venous access devices in neonatal intensive care

Article Title: Management of Peripheral Venous Access Devices (PVADs): Neonatal European Vascular Access Team – ESPR recommendation 5

Article References: van Rens, M., van der Lee, R., van den Hoogen, A., Rodriguez-Perez, C., Piersigilli, F., Mader, S., Geiger, I., Barone, G., Van Eenoo, S., Hugill, K., on behalf of the Pediatric and Neonatal Vascular Access Special Interest Group (SIG) of the European Society for Pediatric Research (ESPR) and Neonatal European Vascular Access Team (NEVAT), van Rens, M., Van Der Lee, R., van den Hoogen, A., Barone, G., van Eenoo, S., Hugill, K., Breschan, C., Pittiruti, M., … Tuna, M. L. (2026). Management of Peripheral Venous Access Devices (PVADs): Neonatal European Vascular Access Team – ESPR recommendation 5. Pediatric Research. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-026-05462-x

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1038/s41390-026-05462-x

Keywords: neonatology, vascular access, peripheral venous catheters, ESPR, NEVAT, near-infrared vein imaging, cyanoacrylate glue, extravasation, RaSuVA, infusion therapy standards, neonatal intensive care, clinical recommendations

The introductory paper, published on 17 September 2026, is the work of Fiammetta Piersigilli of Louvain University’s Saint Luc neonatal intensive care unit in Brussels, together with Kevin Hugill, Robin van der Lee, Matheus F. P. T. van Rens, Giovanni Barone, Tobias Werther, Bernhard Schwaberger and Suzy Van Eenoo, writing on behalf of the Pediatric and Neonatal Vascular Access Special Interest Group of the European Society for Paediatric Research (ESPR) and the vascular access network NEVAT. The group spans institutions across Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Austria, Portugal, Bulgaria, France, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States, reflecting a deliberate effort to build recommendations that transcend local custom and national tradition. The authors state plainly that vascular access is a pervasive facet of contemporary neonatal practice that lacks standardization, and that some long-standing practices have never been supported by solid evidence.

The technical challenge at the heart of neonatal vascular access is scale. A peripheral vein in a premature infant weighing 500 grams may be less than a millimeter in diameter, with a wall thinner than a human hair. Inserting a cannula into such a vessel demands extraordinary precision, and even a successful placement can fail within hours if the device is not secured and managed correctly. Peripheral intravenous cannulation, the most common procedure in neonatal care, carries substantial complication rates. A multicenter observational study cited by the authors reported significant rates of infiltration, phlebitis and inadvertent dislodgement in neonates, and subsequent research has identified both unmodifiable factors, such as gestational age and vein characteristics, and potentially modifiable factors, such as securement technique and dressing choice, that shape how long a device survives and how often it fails.

Beyond the mechanical risks, the series highlights a dimension of neonatal care that has gained increasing scientific attention in recent years: the developmental and neurobiological cost of repeated painful procedures. Neonates undergoing intensive care may experience dozens of invasive procedures during their stay, and systematic reviews have linked early procedural pain exposure to adverse developmental outcomes in children born preterm. Researchers have also framed the cumulative stress of intensive care as a form of toxic stress that can alter infant outcomes, making every avoided cannulation attempt and every extended device dwell time a meaningful gain for the developing brain. In this light, vascular access is not merely a technical task but a determinant of long-term neurodevelopment, which is precisely why the authors argue that objective, evidence-based standardization matters so much.

The ten recommendations that structure the special series cover the full lifecycle of a vascular access device, from the moment a clinician decides that one is needed to the moment it is removed. A central theme is that the decision to place a device should be made deliberately rather than reflexively. The authors point to the Abba Project, whose name stands for Assess Better before Access, a retrospective cohort study of neonatal intravascular device outcomes that encouraged teams to evaluate whether a device was truly necessary and which type was most appropriate before any needle touched the skin. Decision-support tools such as the neonatal DAV-Expert algorithm, developed through an Italian consensus process, guide clinicians toward the most suitable venous access for a given newborn, balancing expected duration of therapy, osmolarity and pH of infusates, and the condition of available vessels.

Assessment of the infant’s veins before insertion is another pillar of the recommendations. The Rapid Superficial Vein Assessment protocol, known as RASUVA, provides a structured pre-procedural evaluation of superficial veins to optimize catheterization, reducing the number of failed attempts. Once a device is in place, the series draws on insertion bundles that have demonstrated measurable reductions in complications. These include the SIUVEC protocol for safe insertion of umbilical venous catheters, the SIECC insertion bundle for epicutaneo-caval catheters, the so-called GAVECELT bundle applied to central venous catheterization in neonates and children in a prospective study of more than 700 cases, and the Neo-Echotip protocol, which uses ultrasound for tip navigation and tip location during placement of central venous access devices. Intracavitary electrocardiography, in which the catheter itself is used as an electrode to confirm tip position, offers an alternative to chest radiography for verifying that a catheter tip sits in the correct position, reducing radiation exposure and delays.

Securement and infection prevention receive equally rigorous treatment. Central line-associated bloodstream infections remain among the most feared complications of neonatal intensive care, and quality improvement work has shown that adopting evidence-based care bundles can drive infection rates toward zero. The recommendations also embrace a material innovation that has rapidly entered neonatal practice: cyanoacrylate glue, the same class of medical adhesive used in tissue bonding. Randomized and observational studies have evaluated octyl-butyl-cyanoacrylate glue for sutureless securement of epicutaneo-caval catheters, umbilical venous catheters and peripheral intravenous catheters in neonates, with results suggesting reduced dislodgement and fewer complications compared with traditional adhesive dressings and sutures. Because glue eliminates puncture sites from sutures and creates a microbial seal at the insertion point, it represents a technically elegant solution to one of the most persistent problems in the field.

Standardization also extends to language. The series incorporates the Navigate Project, a position statement from European vascular access societies establishing a common nomenclature for vascular access devices. The authors argue that inconsistent terminology, in which the same device may be called different things in different countries or even different wards of the same hospital, undermines research, benchmarking and safe communication between teams. A shared vocabulary allows complication rates to be compared meaningfully across units and allows evidence generated in one setting to be translated reliably into another. This effort aligns with broader international frameworks, including the Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice, whose ninth edition provides an overarching reference for infusion-related care, and the ERPIUP consensus on the proper indication and use of peripheral venous access devices in adults, whose methodology the neonatal group adapted to its own population.

What makes the series notable is its candor about the limits of the evidence. The authors emphasize that the recommendations consolidate existing knowledge and consensus rather than presenting definitive trial data, and they explicitly frame the series as a means of highlighting priorities for further research to address gaps in knowledge. Many practices in neonatal vascular access have evolved through apprenticeship and habit rather than randomized evidence, and the ten recommendations are as much a research agenda as a clinical guideline. By naming where the evidence is thin, the group hopes to direct future studies toward the questions that matter most for outcomes, from optimal dwell times to the long-term developmental impact of procedural pain.

For clinicians, the practical message is that objective standardization of neonatal vascular access is achievable now, with tools that already exist. For the smallest patients, whose veins are fragile and whose developing brains are exquisitely sensitive to stress, the stakes of getting this right could hardly be higher. If the series succeeds in bridging practice gaps and supporting evidence-based standardization across neonatal units worldwide, it may quietly transform one of the most routine yet consequential procedures in medicine, turning an area long governed by individual habit into one governed by shared, scrutinized and continually improved evidence.

Subject of Research: Standardization of neonatal vascular access through international expert consensus recommendations

Article Title: Introduction to the special article series to guide neonatal vascular access

Article References: Piersigilli, F., Hugill, K., van der Lee, R., van Rens, M. F. P. T., Barone, G., Werther, T., Schwaberger, B., Van Eenoo, S., on behalf of the Pediatric and Neonatal Vascular Access SIG of the ESPR and NEVAT, Van Der Lee, R., van Rens, M., van Eenoo, S., van den Hoogen, A., Rodriguez-Perez, C., Breschan, C., Pittiruti, M., Oulego-Erroz, I., Ouwehand, T., Debuf, M.-J., … Tuna, M. L. (2026). Introduction to the special article series to guide neonatal vascular access. Pediatric Research. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-026-05468-5

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1038/s41390-026-05468-5

Keywords: neonatal vascular access, Pediatric Research, clinical consensus, central venous catheters, peripheral intravenous cannulation, cyanoacrylate glue, ultrasound guidance, catheter-related bloodstream infection, neonatal pain, ESPR, NEVAT, patient safety

Intra-arterial catheters, or IACs, are thin tubes placed directly into peripheral arteries, most commonly the radial artery at the wrist or the posterior tibial artery at the ankle. Once in place, they allow beat-to-beat blood pressure monitoring and painless blood sampling, sparing fragile infants the repeated needle punctures that would otherwise be required. The new recommendation emphasizes that the value of these devices comes with real risks: arterial lines can cause ischemia, infection, bleeding, and injury to delicate neonatal vessels and surrounding nerves. Because premature infants may weigh less than a kilogram and have arteries with internal diameters of well under a millimeter, the technical margin for error is extraordinarily narrow. The authors argue that this combination of high stakes and high variability is precisely why a standardized, evidence-based approach is overdue.

A central technical theme of the recommendation is the use of ultrasound guidance during insertion. Traditional arterial cannulation relies on palpation, feeling the pulse and advancing the needle blindly toward it. In neonates, whose vessels are tiny, mobile, and easily compressed by the palpating finger, this approach frequently fails and can traumatize the vessel. Recent studies cited by the panel, including retrospective observational work on real-time ultrasound-guided peripheral arterial cannulation in infants and case series demonstrating success even in very low birth weight infants who are conventionally considered difficult to cannulate, show that ultrasound dramatically improves first-pass success. A 2023 Cochrane systematic review of ultrasound-guided arterial cannulation in children supports the technique’s advantages, and dedicated protocols such as the Safe Insertion of Arterial Catheters approach have been developed specifically to minimize complications by combining ultrasound imaging with structured technique.

The recommendation also addresses the choice of insertion site, which is far from trivial. The radial artery of the forearm remains the most common target, but the panel reviews the vascular anatomy of the limb in detail, noting that collateral circulation, the backup blood supply that keeps tissue alive if the cannulated artery occludes, must be adequate before a line is placed. The ulnar artery has been proposed as an alternative cannulation site in neonates, and the posterior tibial artery offers another option for lower-limb access. Femoral artery catheterization, by contrast, is treated with considerable caution. Although some cohort studies have reported acceptable outcomes, published cases of limb length shortening associated with femoral arterial lines in the neonatal period highlight the potential for long-term harm when a major vessel supplying a growing leg is compromised. The guidance therefore steers clinicians toward peripheral sites with robust collateral flow whenever clinically feasible.

Catheter selection itself receives technical attention. Ultrasound can be used not only to guide the needle but also to measure the cross-sectional internal diameter of the target artery before cannulation, allowing clinicians to match catheter size to vessel size. Oversized catheters are thought to increase the risk of flow obstruction and ischemic injury, while undersized catheters may kink or fail to transmit accurate pressure waveforms. The recommendation draws on studies of distal radial artery diameter in neonates and infants to support this measurement-based approach, embedding it within the broader vessel health and preservation framework that underpins the whole series: choose the right device, for the right patient, at the right time, and preserve the vasculature for future needs.

Once the catheter is in place, securement becomes the next battleground for standardization. The panel reviews the evidence on transparent semipermeable membranes, including comparative studies of their moisture-vapor transmission properties, and on medical adhesive-related skin injuries, which are a documented hazard in neonatology where the stratum corneum of premature skin is paper-thin. Tissue adhesives such as octyl-butyl-cyanoacrylate glue, already studied for securing peripheral intravenous catheters in neonates, and dialkylcarbamoylchloride-impregnated dressings used at catheter exit sites are discussed as part of a modern securement toolkit. Limb fixation technique is another practical focus: the recommendation describes positioning and splinting methods for both upper and lower limbs that keep the catheter functional without immobilizing the joint so rigidly that circulation or skin integrity is compromised. The goal is a line that stays put, stays patent, and does not injure the skin it crosses.

Perhaps the most striking pharmacological element of the guidance concerns topical nitroglycerin. Arterial spasm is a common reason that cannulation attempts fail and a suspected contributor to ischemic complications after lines are placed. A systematic review and meta-analysis published in Archives of Disease in Childhood found that local nitroglycerin facilitates peripheral arterial cannulation in children, and separate systematic reviews in neonates have examined topical nitroglycerin for treating ischemic injuries, including analyses of nitroglycerin patch application in premature babies with peripheral arterial ischemia. By synthesizing this evidence, the recommendation gives clinicians a rational, evidence-based adjunct: a vasodilator applied to the skin to relax the vessel, improve the odds of a successful first attempt, and potentially rescue compromised perfusion, all while acknowledging the need to monitor for hypotension in infants whose blood pressure is already precarious.

The management phase of an arterial line’s life, from flushing regimens to pressure monitoring to the decision to remove the device, is also covered. Direct arterial pressure measurement differs systematically from indirect cuff-based techniques, and the panel points to comparative studies in pediatric intensive care to remind clinicians that the two are not interchangeable. Infusion therapy standards, most recently the ninth edition of the Infusion Nurses Society standards of practice, provide the backbone for aseptic technique, dressing changes, and surveillance, consistent with national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections. The recommendation frames all of this within a patient-centered structure built on the 7-Rights framework and the standardized nomenclature developed through the NAVIGATE project, so that a catheter described in one hospital means the same thing in another, a prerequisite for meaningful quality improvement and research.

What makes this document notable is not a single dramatic discovery but the quiet rigor of consensus built on evidence. The work was not externally funded, the authors declare no competing interests, and the writing team spans neonatologists, nurses, and vascular access specialists from institutions across the Netherlands, France, Austria, Belgium, Italy, the United Kingdom, Bulgaria, Portugal, Spain, and beyond, with input from foundations representing parents of newborn infants. For a field in which some practices, as the authors bluntly state, lack supporting evidence, the recommendation represents a deliberate turn from tradition toward accountability. If the remaining installments in the ten-part series match this one, neonatal units across Europe may soon share a common technical language for the lines that keep their smallest patients alive, and the infants hooked to those lines may face fewer failed attempts, fewer injured vessels, and safer first days of life.

Subject of Research: Evidence-based management of intra-arterial catheters in neonates

Article Title: Management of intra-arterial catheters: neonatal european vascular access team—ESPR recommendation 6

Article References: van der Lee, R., Yousef, N., Schwaberger, B., De Bisschop, B., Piersigilli, F., Ouwehand, T., Van Eenoo, S., Hugill, K., van Rens, M., on behalf of the Pediatric and Neonatal Vascular Access Special Interest Group (SIG) of the European Society for Pediatric Research (ESPR) and Neonatal European Vascular Access Team (NEVAT), Van der Lee, R., De Bisschop, B., Van Eenoo, S., van Rens, M., Debuf, M.-J., Milan, A., Barone, G., Pittiruti, M., Werther, T., … Tuna, M. L. (2026). Management of intra-arterial catheters: neonatal european vascular access team—ESPR recommendation 6. Pediatric Research. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-026-05470-x

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1038/s41390-026-05470-x

Keywords: neonatology, intra-arterial catheters, vascular access, ultrasound guidance, radial artery, nitroglycerin, catheter securement, preterm infants, ESPR, NEVAT, blood pressure monitoring, ischemia

The document, led by Matheus van Rens and Robin van der Lee of Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, together with an international consortium spanning the Netherlands, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Spain, Portugal, France, Bulgaria, the United Kingdom, and beyond, tackles a problem that is deceptively simple to state and notoriously difficult to solve: peripheral intravenous lines in newborns fail, and they fail often. Multicenter observational work cited by the group has documented substantial complication rates in neonatal peripheral cannulation, including infiltration, extravasation, phlebitis, and dislodgement. When a line fails, a baby endures another painful needle stick, clinicians lose precious time, and the delivery of critical therapy is interrupted. In an era when neonatal intensive care has become extraordinarily sophisticated, the humble peripheral cannula has remained a stubbornly weak link.

What makes the new recommendation distinctive is its insistence that vascular access should be planned, not improvised. The authors argue that decisions about which device to place in which baby should shift from habit-driven choices to individualized vascular access planning, in which the intended therapy, its expected duration, and the anatomy of the infant’s veins are assessed before the first needle is inserted. This philosophy builds on the group’s earlier research, including the ABBA project, whose name stands for assess better before access, a retrospective cohort study of neonatal intravascular device outcomes that underscored how much of the variability in device success traces back to decisions made at the very start of therapy. It also aligns with the neonatal DAV-expert algorithm, a consensus framework developed with the Italian vascular access groups GAVeCeLT and GAVePed for choosing the most appropriate venous access in newborns.

A central technical pillar of the recommendation is standardized vein assessment before cannulation. The document endorses the Rapid Superficial Vein Assessment protocol, known as RaSuVA, a pre-procedural systematic evaluation of the superficial veins designed to optimize venous catheterization in neonates. Rather than palpating blindly for a promising-looking vessel, clinicians using RaSuVA systematically survey candidate veins, often with the aid of visualization technology, and select the best available target before puncturing the skin. The logic is straightforward: the quality of the vein chosen at minute zero largely determines whether the catheter will still be functioning days later. Assessment protocols of this kind convert an art into a repeatable procedure, and they give vascular access teams a common language for documenting why a particular vein and device were chosen.

Visualization technology itself features prominently in the recommendation. Near-infrared light devices, which project an image of subcutaneous veins onto the skin by detecting the differential absorption of infrared light by hemoglobin, have been studied in neonatal units as aids to peripheral cannulation. A cross-sectional study in a level III neonatal intensive care unit examined the efficiency of such systems, and a 2024 meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessed their effectiveness for peripheral intravenous cannulation in children and adolescents. The recommendation’s authors position these tools within a broader assessment strategy rather than as magic bullets, emphasizing that technology works best when combined with a structured protocol and trained hands. For premature infants whose veins are nearly invisible to the naked eye, even modest improvements in first-attempt success can spare significant distress.

Once a catheter is in place, keeping it there becomes the next battle, and here the recommendation embraces a material that might surprise readers outside the field: medical-grade cyanoacrylate glue. The same class of chemistry found in household superglue, formulated for tissue contact, has emerged as a sutureless securement method for vascular catheters. The group cites retrospective observational work on octyl-butyl-cyanoacrylate glue for securing peripheral intravenous catheters in neonates, as well as a decade of clinical experience with cyanoacrylate securement in a large university hospital and studies of its use for epicutaneo-caval catheters in newborns. Glue-based securement anchors the catheter, seals the puncture site, and may reduce the micro-motion at the catheter tip that contributes to vein irritation. The consortium has even published a dedicated protocol for the safe and effective removal of the adhesive from fragile neonatal skin, acknowledging that a securement method is only as good as its removal strategy.

Securement, however, is a balancing act. The skin of a premature infant is structurally immature, and adhesive dressings can cause medical adhesive-related skin injuries, a problem documented in neonatology departments. The recommendation therefore engages with the properties of transparent semipermeable membranes, including their moisture-vapor transmission characteristics, and with modern infusion therapy standards that govern dressing changes and site inspection. The goal is a securement system that holds the catheter firmly, allows the skin to breathe, permits visual inspection of the insertion site, and peels away without tearing the epidermis. These may sound like small engineering details, but in a two-kilogram infant, they are the difference between a line that lasts a week and one that fails within hours.

Perhaps the most forward-looking element of the recommendation is its attention to detecting failure early. Infiltration and extravasation, in which infused fluid leaks out of the vein into surrounding tissue, are among the most common and feared complications of peripheral therapy in neonates, and severe extravasation injuries can cause lasting tissue damage. The authors highlight research into novel sensor technology for earlier notification of such events in the neonatal population, as well as work on optical detection of infiltration during peripheral intravenous infusion in newborns. The premise is compelling: rather than waiting for a nurse to notice swelling or for an alarm to sound after tissue has already been harmed, continuous monitoring could flag the leak at its onset, allowing the infusion to be stopped before injury occurs. Combined with retrospective analyses of the modifiable and unmodifiable factors that drive device-related complications, this surveillance-oriented approach reframes catheter failure not as bad luck but as a preventable event with detectable precursors.

The recommendation also situates peripheral devices within the full spectrum of neonatal vascular access, including long peripheral catheters, which occupy the gap between short peripheral cannulas and centrally placed epicutaneous-caval catheters, and the prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infections, a field with its own established evidence base. Antiseptic skin preparation before catheter insertion, including the use of chlorhexidine gluconate in isopropyl alcohol in premature neonates, is addressed in light of Cochrane evidence on antiseptic solutions for neonatal central catheter insertion. Even the experience of the baby and family is not neglected: the consortium has published work on maintaining parent-infant skin-to-skin contact during catheter insertion, reflecting a growing conviction that technical excellence and developmental care are not competing priorities but complementary ones.

What emerges from the document is less a single technique than a system: standardized nomenclature, consistent with the NAVIGATE project’s position statement on vascular access device terminology; structured pre-procedural assessment; evidence-informed device selection; modern securement; vigilant surveillance; and gentle removal. The authors acknowledge that some long-standing practices in neonatal vascular access lack supporting evidence, and their recommendation is explicitly an effort to close that gap with structured, evidence-based guidance. For a field in which the difference between success and failure is measured in millimeters of vein and hours of dwell time, the arrival of a unified European standard for peripheral venous access marks a quiet but consequential shift. If the recommendation achieves its aims, the smallest patients in intensive care will spend less time being stuck with needles and more time simply being babies.

Subject of Research: Evidence-based management of peripheral venous access devices in neonatal care

Article Title: Management of peripheral venous access devices (PVADs): Neonatal European Vascular Access Team – ESPR Recommendation 5

Article References: Management of peripheral venous access devices (PVADs): Neonatal European Vascular Access Team – ESPR Recommendation 5. (n.d.). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-026-05515-1

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1038/s41390-026-05515-1

Keywords: neonatology, vascular access, peripheral venous access devices, ESPR recommendations, NEVAT, RaSuVA, cyanoacrylate glue, near-infrared vein visualization, extravasation, neonatal intensive care, catheter securement, Pediatric Research