Suppr超能文献

连续性肾脏替代治疗可能会增加导管感染的风险。

Continuous renal replacement therapy may increase the risk of catheter infection.

机构信息

Biostatistics and Clinical Research, Côte de Nacre University Hospital, Caen, France.

出版信息

Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Aug;5(8):1489-96. doi: 10.2215/CJN.02130310. Epub 2010 Jun 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Little is known about the risks of catheter-related infections in patients undergoing intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) as compared with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) techniques. We compared the two modalities among critically ill adults requiring acute renal replacement therapy (RRT).

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We used the multicenter Cathedia study cohort of 736 critically ill adults requiring RRT. Cox marginal structural models were used to compare time to catheter-tip colonization at removal (intent-to-treat, primary endpoint) among patients who started IHD (n = 470) versus CRRT (n = 266). On-treatment analysis was also conducted to take into account changes in prescription of RRT modality.

RESULTS

Hazard rate of catheter-tip colonization did not increase within the first 10 days of catheter use. Predictors of catheter-tip colonization were higher lactate levels and hypertension, while systemic antibiotics, antiseptics-impregnated catheters, and mechanical ventilation were associated with decreased risk. The incidence of catheter-tip colonization per 1000 catheter-days was 42.7 in the IHD group and 27.7 in the CRRT group (P < 0.01). This association was no longer significant after correction for channeling bias (weighted HR, 0.96; 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.20, P = 0.73). On-treatment analysis revealed an increased risk of primary endpoint during CRRT exposure as compared with IHD exposure (weighted HR, 0.71; 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.92, P < 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results do not support the use of CRRT when IHD could be an alternative to reduce the risk of catheter-related infection.

摘要

背景和目的

与连续性肾脏替代疗法(CRRT)技术相比,间歇性血液透析(IHD)患者导管相关感染的风险知之甚少。我们比较了两种方式在需要急性肾脏替代治疗(RRT)的危重症成人中的应用。

设计、设置、参与者和测量:我们使用了多中心 Cathedia 研究队列中的 736 名需要 RRT 的危重症成人。使用 Cox 边缘结构模型比较了开始 IHD(n = 470)与 CRRT(n = 266)的患者在去除时导管尖端定植的时间(意向治疗,主要终点)。还进行了治疗中分析,以考虑 RRT 方式处方的变化。

结果

导管尖端定植的危险率在导管使用的前 10 天内没有增加。导管尖端定植的预测因素是较高的乳酸水平和高血压,而全身抗生素、抗菌浸渍导管和机械通气与降低风险相关。IHD 组每 1000 个导管日的导管尖端定植发生率为 42.7,CRRT 组为 27.7(P < 0.01)。在纠正通道偏差后,这种关联不再显著(加权 HR,0.96;95%CI:0.77 至 1.20,P = 0.73)。治疗中分析显示,与 IHD 相比,CRRT 暴露时主要终点的风险增加(加权 HR,0.71;95%CI:0.56 至 0.92,P < 0.009)。

结论

我们的结果不支持使用 CRRT 替代 IHD 来降低导管相关感染的风险。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验