Princess Máxima Centre for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of Medical Microbiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Eur J Haematol. 2024 May;112(5):832-839. doi: 10.1111/ejh.14175. Epub 2024 Jan 31.
The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability of the central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in pediatric oncology patients.
Bacteremia episodes from 2020 to 2022 from a prospective cohort of pediatric oncology patients with a central venous catheter were included. Episodes were classified by three medical experts following the CLABSI criteria as either a CLABSI or non-CLABSI (i.e., contamination, other infection source, or mucosal barrier injury-laboratory confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI)). Subsequently, they were asked if and why they (dis)agreed with this diagnosis following the criteria. The primary outcome was the percentage of episodes where the experts clinically disagreed with the diagnosis given following the CLABSI criteria.
Overall, 84 bacteremia episodes in 71 patients were evaluated. Following the CLABSI criteria, 34 (40%) episodes were classified as CLABSIs and 50 (60%) as non-CLABSIs. In 11 (13%) cases the experts clinically disagreed with the diagnosis following the CLABSI criteria. The discrepancy between the CLABSI criteria and clinical diagnosis was significant; McNemar's test p < .01. Disagreement by the experts with the CLABSI criteria mostly occurred when the experts found an MBI-LCBI a more plausible cause of the bacteremia than a CLABSI due to the presence of a gram negative bacteremia (Pseudomonas aeruginosa n = 3) and/or mucositis.
A discrepancy between the CLABSI criteria and the evaluation of the experts was observed. Adding Pseudomonas aeruginosa as an MBI pathogen and incorporating the presence of mucositis in the MBI-LCBI criteria, might increase the applicability.
本研究旨在探讨疾病预防控制中心(CDC)中心静脉相关血流感染(CLABSI)标准在儿科肿瘤患者中的适用性。
纳入了 2020 年至 2022 年期间接受中心静脉导管的儿科肿瘤患者前瞻性队列中的菌血症发作。根据 CLABSI 标准,三位医学专家将发作分为 CLABSI 或非 CLABSI(即污染、其他感染源或黏膜屏障损伤-实验室确认的血流感染(MBI-LCBI))。随后,他们被要求根据标准询问他们是否以及为何不同意这种诊断。主要结局是专家根据 CLABSI 标准对诊断的临床意见分歧的发作比例。
总体而言,评估了 71 名患者中的 84 个菌血症发作。根据 CLABSI 标准,34 个(40%)发作被归类为 CLABSI,50 个(60%)为非 CLABSI。在 11 例(13%)中,专家对 CLABSI 标准的临床诊断存在分歧。CLABSI 标准与临床诊断之间的差异具有统计学意义;McNemar 检验 p < 0.01。专家与 CLABSI 标准不一致主要发生在专家认为 MBI-LCBI 是菌血症的更合理原因,而不是由于革兰氏阴性菌血症(铜绿假单胞菌 n = 3)和/或粘膜炎导致的 CLABSI 时。
观察到 CLABSI 标准与专家评估之间存在差异。增加铜绿假单胞菌作为 MBI 病原体,并将粘膜炎纳入 MBI-LCBI 标准中,可能会提高适用性。