Silva Jorge, Baptista Alexandre, Ramos Aura, Ponce Pedro
Department of Nephrology, Hospital Garcia de Orta, Almada, Portugal.
Nephron Clin Pract. 2008;110(4):c251-7. doi: 10.1159/000167873. Epub 2008 Oct 31.
The use of tunneled hemodialysis catheters as definitive vascular access is becoming increasingly more widespread, reaching 25% of all dialysis patients in some countries. The rate of infectious morbidity and mortality is much higher when catheters are used than when patients are dialyzed through grafts or native fistulas, and it is generally agreed that implementing appropriate preventive measures would do more to lower its incidence.
A prospective, randomized, open-label, long-term follow-up clinical trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of dressing the exit site with antibiotic ointment (AO) versus catheter antimicrobial locking (AL) in preventing catheter-related bacteremia (CRB), both associated with strict standard precautions and appropriate catheter care. A total of 141 tunneled catheters, newly implanted in 116 consecutive patients, were followed during a 2-year period. Patients were randomly distributed into one of three arms, with group A receiving AO prophylaxis, group B treated with a heparin + gentamicin (5.2 mg/ml) lock (AL) and group C receiving both AO and AL prophylaxis.
Group A had a significantly lower infection-free time survival curve (p < 0.02, Kaplan-Meier) with a catheter survival of 103.9 days and a significantly higher number of CRB (9 episodes, p < 0.02, chi(2)). Group B had 130.7 mean infection-free days and 1 episode of CRB. Group C had 127.3 mean infection-free days and 5 episodes of CRB. No toxicity or other adverse events were observed during this 2-year period, and the efficacy of the preventive measures remained stable throughout.
Antimicrobial lock is superior to AO as a CRB preventive measure. The use of lock and ointment in the same catheter was not associated with additive effects.
使用带隧道的血液透析导管作为确定性血管通路的情况日益普遍,在一些国家,此类导管在所有透析患者中所占比例达25%。与通过移植血管或自体动静脉内瘘进行透析的患者相比,使用导管时的感染发病率和死亡率要高得多,人们普遍认为,实施适当的预防措施对降低其发生率会有更大帮助。
开展一项前瞻性、随机、开放标签、长期随访的临床试验,比较用抗生素软膏(AO)涂抹出口部位与导管抗菌封管(AL)在预防导管相关菌血症(CRB)方面的疗效,两者均结合严格的标准预防措施和适当的导管护理。在2年期间对116例连续患者新植入的总共141根带隧道导管进行了随访。患者被随机分为三组之一,A组接受AO预防,B组采用肝素+庆大霉素(5.2mg/ml)封管(AL)治疗,C组同时接受AO和AL预防。
A组的无感染时间生存曲线显著更低(p<0.02,Kaplan-Meier法),导管存活时间为103.9天,CRB发生次数显著更多(9次发作,p<0.02,卡方检验)。B组平均无感染天数为130.7天,有1次CRB发作。C组平均无感染天数为127.3天,有5次CRB发作。在这2年期间未观察到毒性反应或其他不良事件,且预防措施的疗效在整个期间保持稳定。
作为一种CRB预防措施,抗菌封管优于AO。在同一导管中同时使用封管和软膏未显示出相加效应。