Suppr超能文献

减少外周静脉穿刺中心静脉导管出口部位的细菌定植:含氯己定海绵敷料与氰基丙烯酸酯的比较。

Reduction of bacterial colonization at the exit site of peripherally inserted central catheters: A comparison between chlorhexidine-releasing sponge dressings and cyano-acrylate.

作者信息

Gilardi Emanuele, Piano Alfonso, Chellini Pietro, Fiori Barbara, Dolcetti Laura, Pittiruti Mauro, Scoppettuolo Giancarlo

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

Department of Laboratory and Infectious Science, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

J Vasc Access. 2021 Jul;22(4):597-601. doi: 10.1177/1129729820954743. Epub 2020 Sep 4.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

A serious complication associated with Central Venous Access Device (CVAD) is infection because of bacterial contamination, either by the extra-luminal or by the intra-luminal route.We evaluated the efficacy, the safety, and the cost-effectiveness of two strategies for non-inferiority in controlling bacterial colonization of the exit-site of Peripherally-Inserted Central Catheters (PICC).

METHODS

After PICC placement, a skin swab of the exit site was taken and cultured. In group A the exit site was sealed with N-butyl-cyanoacrylate glue, while in group B a chlorhexidine-releasing sponge dressing was applied. A second skin culture was taken at day 7.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients were enrolled in each group. In 42 patients the second skin culture was not performed because of 20 patients were lost at follow-up or deceased and in 22 patients the dressing needed to be changed early, because of local bleeding (13 cases, in group B) or because of dressing detachment (four in group A and five in group B). The microbiological study was completed in 36 patients in group A and 24 in group B. No microorganisms were isolated in any patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Both strategies were effective in controlling bacterial colonization. Glue was effective in reducing local bleeding, and it was more cost-effective than sponge dressing. During the first week, when local bleeding and bacterial colonization must be prevented, glue might be more appropriate than chlorhexidine-releasing dressing; after the first week chlorhexidine-releasing dressing might be preferable, considering that the safety of glue application on the skin for prolonged periods is still questionable.

摘要

引言

与中心静脉通路装置(CVAD)相关的一种严重并发症是因细菌污染导致的感染,细菌可通过腔外或腔内途径污染。我们评估了两种非劣效性策略在控制经外周静脉穿刺中心静脉导管(PICC)出口部位细菌定植方面的有效性、安全性和成本效益。

方法

PICC置入后,采集出口部位的皮肤拭子进行培养。A组用氰基丙烯酸正丁酯胶水封闭出口部位,而B组应用含氯己定的海绵敷料。在第7天进行第二次皮肤培养。

结果

每组共纳入51例患者。42例患者未进行第二次皮肤培养,原因是20例患者失访或死亡,22例患者因局部出血(B组13例)或敷料脱落(A组4例,B组5例)需要提前更换敷料。A组36例患者和B组24例患者完成了微生物学研究。所有患者均未分离出微生物。

结论

两种策略在控制细菌定植方面均有效。胶水在减少局部出血方面有效,且比海绵敷料更具成本效益。在第一周,当必须预防局部出血和细菌定植时,胶水可能比含氯己定的敷料更合适;考虑到胶水长时间应用于皮肤的安全性仍存在疑问,第一周后含氯己定的敷料可能更可取。

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