Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Narrative review examines perioperative IV infiltration, highlighting its risks in high-risk populations and suggesting prevention methods.
Peripheral IV (PIV) access is nearly universal in perioperative care and beyond. It is often regarded as low risk. Yet perioperative PIV infiltration remains a persistent source of patient harm, particularly in anesthetized or sedated patients who cannot report early symptoms. Injuries range from transient soft tissue edema to severe complications, including skin necrosis, nerve injury, and compartment syndrome requiring surgical intervention. Furthermore, if the sole PIV access is nonfunctional, administration of life-saving rescue medications and transfusions may be delayed. Despite its frequency and potential severity, perioperative PIV infiltration remains inconsistently reported and understudied. This narrative review examines the epidemiology, mechanisms, prevention, detection, and management of perioperative PIV infiltration. The authors particularly emphasize its implications in high-risk populations, drug-specific injury mechanisms, and perioperative system vulnerabilities. They highlight gaps in evidence and propose priorities for future research and quality improvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brook et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: