Chen Xihn-Xuh, Lo Yi-Chu, Su Lin-Hui, Chang Chin-Lu
Department of Critical Care Medicine, Tainan Municipal Hospital, Tainan, Taiwan; Department of Internal Medicine, Tainan Municipal Hospital, Tainan, Taiwan.
Committee of Infection Control, Tainan Municipal Hospital, Tainan, Taiwan.
J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2015 Dec;48(6):625-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jmii.2014.03.006. Epub 2014 May 22.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) requires specific laboratory evidence. A simpler definition, central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), is recommended for surveillance purposes. Because exclusion of all other infection sources is difficult, CRBSI cases may be overestimated by using the CLABSI definition.
A retrospective observational study was performed at a regional hospital in southern Taiwan from September 2012 to December 2013. All 106 reported CLABSI cases were assessed. Cases with catheter tip cultures were reviewed. CRBSI was defined as the identification of same organisms from the paired blood and catheter tip cultures (≥15 colony-forming units) without evidence of secondary bacteremia from other infection sources.
Overall, 64 cases were included and 31 (48.4%) were defined as CRBSI cases. In 30 (46.9%) cases, catheter tips were cultured after the corresponding blood cultures were performed. Later tip cultures were significantly more frequent in cases with other catheter types (18/22, 81.8%) than those with central lines (12/42, 28.6%; p < 0.0001). The same significant difference was also found among the CRBSI cases (central lines, 3/17, 17.6%; others, 13/14, 92.9%; p < 0.00005). Twelve bacterial species were identified from the CRBSI cases, with Staphylococcus aureus being the most frequent (13, 41.9%), followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5, 16.1%).
The positive predictive value of the CLABSI definition for CRBSI cases was 48.4%. One should be aware of this discrepancy and should interpret the CLABSI surveillance definition with care.
背景/目的:导管相关血流感染(CRBSI)的诊断需要特定的实验室证据。为了监测目的,推荐使用一个更简单的定义,即中心静脉导管相关血流感染(CLABSI)。由于排除所有其他感染源很困难,使用CLABSI定义可能会高估CRBSI病例。
2012年9月至2013年12月在台湾南部一家地区医院进行了一项回顾性观察研究。对所有106例报告的CLABSI病例进行了评估。对有导管尖端培养结果的病例进行了复查。CRBSI被定义为在配对的血培养和导管尖端培养中鉴定出相同的微生物(≥15个菌落形成单位),且没有其他感染源导致继发性菌血症的证据。
总体而言,纳入了64例病例,其中31例(48.4%)被定义为CRBSI病例。在30例(46.9%)病例中,导管尖端培养是在相应的血培养之后进行的。与中心静脉导管相比,其他类型导管的病例中后来进行尖端培养的频率显著更高(22例中的18例,81.8% 比42例中的12例,28.6%;p < 0.0001)。在CRBSI病例中也发现了同样显著的差异(中心静脉导管,17例中的3例,17.6%;其他,14例中的13例,92.9%;p < 0.00005)。从CRBSI病例中鉴定出了12种细菌,金黄色葡萄球菌最为常见(13例,41.9%),其次是铜绿假单胞菌(5例,16.1%)。
CLABSI定义对CRBSI病例的阳性预测值为48.4%。人们应该意识到这种差异,并谨慎解释CLABSI监测定义。