Ohtake Shimon, Takahashi Hiromichi, Nakagawa Masaru, Uchino Yoshihito, Miura Katsuhiro, Iriyama Noriyoshi, Nakayama Tomohiro, Hatta Yoshihiro, Takei Masami
Division of Hematology and Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Division of Hematology and Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan; Division of Laboratory Medicine, Department of Pathology of Microbiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
J Infect Chemother. 2018 Jul;24(7):544-548. doi: 10.1016/j.jiac.2018.03.001. Epub 2018 Apr 4.
A central venous catheter (CVC) is a catheter placed into a large vein, and is used for chemotherapy administration. However, there is little confirmatory data on which antiseptic-such as chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine (PI) -is more protective against CVC-related infectious complications in patients receiving intensive chemotherapy. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of 1% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% alcohol (CH) vs. PI for skin disinfection before CVC insertion in patients receiving intensive chemotherapy. Methods We used either CH or 10% PI as skin antiseptics before CVC insertion, and assessed which agent was more protective against CVC-related infection. The participants were 112 patients with haematologic malignancies who underwent chemotherapy; a total of 292 CVCs were inserted over this period. Blood cultures were obtained when febrile neutropenia occurred. The CVC was removed and the catheter-tip qualitatively cultured when catheter-related infection was suspected. The cumulative incidence of febrile neutropenia, microbial growth from blood or catheter-tip culture, and catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI) was evaluated retrospectively. A univariate Cox proportional hazards model showed that CH significantly alleviated infectious complications. Notably, no case of CRBSI occurred in the CH group. Multivariate analysis, adjusted for prolonged neutropenia (>15 days) and older age (>52 years), also showed significant reduction in the cumulative incidence of microbial growth from catheter-tips in the CH group (hazard ratio = 0.146, 95% confidence interval: 0.023-0.502, p = 0.0008). Disinfection using CH, compared with PI, can potentially decrease catheter-related infection without causing adverse skin reactions in patients with haematologic malignancies.
中心静脉导管(CVC)是一种置入大静脉的导管,用于化疗给药。然而,关于在接受强化化疗的患者中,哪种防腐剂(如氯己定或聚维酮碘(PI))对预防与CVC相关的感染并发症更具保护作用,几乎没有确凿的数据。我们旨在比较70%酒精中的1%葡萄糖酸氯己定(CH)与PI在接受强化化疗的患者插入CVC前进行皮肤消毒的效果。方法我们在插入CVC前使用CH或10%PI作为皮肤防腐剂,并评估哪种制剂对预防CVC相关感染更具保护作用。参与者为112例接受化疗的血液系统恶性肿瘤患者;在此期间共插入了292根CVC。发热性中性粒细胞减少症发生时采集血培养。怀疑有导管相关感染时,拔出CVC并对导管尖端进行定性培养。回顾性评估发热性中性粒细胞减少症、血液或导管尖端培养的微生物生长以及导管相关血流感染(CRBSI)的累积发生率。单变量Cox比例风险模型显示,CH显著减轻了感染并发症。值得注意的是,CH组未发生CRBSI病例。在对延长的中性粒细胞减少症(>15天)和老年(>52岁)进行校正的多变量分析中,也显示CH组导管尖端微生物生长的累积发生率显著降低(风险比=0.146,95%置信区间:0.023-0.502,p=0.0008)。与PI相比,使用CH进行消毒可潜在降低血液系统恶性肿瘤患者的导管相关感染,且不会引起不良皮肤反应。