Kakkos Stavros K, Haddad Georges K, Haddad Roger K, Scully Martha M
Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, 2799 W Grand Boulevard, Detroit, MI 48202, USA.
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008 Jul;19(7):1018-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2008.03.006. Epub 2008 Apr 28.
To compare infection and malfunction rates of two different types of antimicrobial-eluting tunneled cuffed catheters (TCCs) for hemodialysis.
The HemoSplit TCC with BioBloc (silver sulfadiazine) coating (n = 100, control group) and the Tal Palindrome Ruby TCC, which has a novel silver antimicrobial sleeve and a spiral-z tip design (n = 100, study group), were compared in this case-controlled study. The main endpoints were TCC infection and malfunction.
Primary-assisted TCC patency was significantly reduced with the BioBloc TCC (71% and 61% at 90 and 180 days, respectively) compared with the Palindrome Ruby TCC (94% at 90 and 180 days, P < .0001). Multivariate analysis identified only the BioBloc TCC and common femoral access site as independent predictors of worse patency. The unadjusted relative risk (95% confidence interval) for TCC dysfunction with the BioBloc compared with the Palindrome Ruby was 6.0 (2.33-15.53, P < .001), and the relative risk adjusted for access site was 3.2 (1.71-11.96, P = .002). The infection-free rates of the two TCC types were similar (P = .36). The reintervention-free rate for infection or malfunction was significantly better with the Palindrome Ruby TCC (76% and 58% at 90 and 180 days, respectively) than with the BioBloc TCC (60% and 45% at 90 and 180 days, respectively; P = .03).
The results support the use of the Palindrome Ruby TCC on the basis of the significantly lower thrombosis and reintervention rate; randomized trials are justified to confirm this finding and to evaluate its role in the prevention of TCC infection.
比较两种不同类型的抗菌涂层带隧道带涤纶套中心静脉导管(TCC)用于血液透析时的感染率和故障率。
在本病例对照研究中,比较了带有BioBloc(磺胺嘧啶银)涂层的HemoSplit TCC(n = 100,对照组)和具有新型银抗菌套管及螺旋尖端设计的Tal Palindrome Ruby TCC(n = 100,研究组)。主要终点是TCC感染和故障。
与Palindrome Ruby TCC相比,BioBloc TCC的初级辅助TCC通畅率显著降低(90天和180天时分别为71%和61%)(90天和180天时为94%,P <.0001)。多因素分析仅确定BioBloc TCC和股总静脉穿刺部位是通畅性较差的独立预测因素。与Palindrome Ruby相比,BioBloc TCC功能障碍的未调整相对风险(95%置信区间)为6.0(2.33 - 15.53,P <.001),经穿刺部位调整后的相对风险为3.2(1.71 - 11.96,P =.002)。两种TCC类型的无感染率相似(P =.36)。Palindrome Ruby TCC在90天和180天时无感染或故障的再次干预率显著优于BioBloc TCC(分别为76%和58%)(90天和180天时分别为60%和45%;P =.03)。
基于显著更低的血栓形成和再次干预率,结果支持使用Palindrome Ruby TCC;进行随机试验以证实这一发现并评估其在预防TCC感染中的作用是合理的。