Maki D G, Stolz S M, Wheeler S, Mermel L A
University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics-H4/574, Madison 53792, USA.
Ann Intern Med. 1997 Aug 15;127(4):257-66. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-4-199708150-00001.
Bloodstream infection related to short-term use of noncuffed central venous catheters is a common and serious problem. Technologic innovations to reduce the risk for these infections are needed.
To determine 1) the efficacy of a novel antiseptic catheter in preventing central venous catheter-related infection, 2) patient tolerance of this catheter, and 3) the sources of bloodstream infection originating from noncuffed, multilumen central venous catheters.
Randomized, controlled clinical trial.
Medical-surgical intensive care unit of a 450-bed university hospital.
158 adults scheduled to receive a central venous catheter; 403 catheters were studied.
Participants received either a standard triple-lumen polyurethane catheter or a catheter that was indistinguishable from the standard catheter and was impregnated with chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine.
Catheters were studied for colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection at removal; local and systemic effects of catheters were assessed. The origin of each catheter-associated bloodstream infection was sought by culturing all potential sources (skin, catheter segments, hubs, and infusate) and confirmed by restriction-fragment DNA subtyping.
Antiseptic catheters were less likely to be colonized at removal than control catheters (13.5 compared with 24.1 colonized catheters per 100 catheters; relative risk, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.89]; P = 0.005) and were nearly fivefold less likely to produce bloodstream infection (1.0 compared with 4.7 infections per 100 catheters; 1.6 compared with 7.6 infections per 1000 catheter-days; relative risk, 0.21 [CI, 0.03 to 0.95]; P = 0.03). In the control group, 8 catheter-related bloodstream infections were caused by Staphylococcus aureus, gram-negative bacilli, enterococci, or Candida species; no infections with these organisms occurred in the antiseptic catheter group (P = 0.003). No adverse effects from the antiseptic catheter were seen, and none of the 122 isolates obtained from infected catheters in either group showed in vitro resistance to chlorhexidine-silver sulfadiazine. Cost-benefit analysis indicated that the antiseptic catheter should prove cost-beneficial if an institution's rate of catheter-related bacteremia with noncuffed central venous catheters is at least 3 infections per 1000 catheter-days).
The chlorhexidine-silver sulfadiazine catheter is well tolerated, reduces the incidence of catheter-related infection, extends the time that noncuffed central venous catheters can be safely left in place for the short term, and should allow cost savings.
与短期使用无套囊中心静脉导管相关的血流感染是一个常见且严重的问题。需要技术创新来降低这些感染的风险。
随机对照临床试验。
一家拥有450张床位的大学医院的内科 - 外科重症监护病房。
158名计划接受中心静脉导管置入的成年人;共研究了403根导管。
参与者分别接受标准三腔聚氨酯导管或与标准导管外观无差异但浸渍有氯己定和磺胺嘧啶银的导管。
在拔除导管时研究导管的定植情况和与导管相关的血流感染情况;评估导管的局部和全身影响。通过培养所有潜在来源(皮肤、导管段、接头和输注液)寻找每例与导管相关的血流感染的源头,并通过限制性片段DNA亚型分析进行确认。
拔除时,抗菌导管的定植可能性低于对照导管(每100根导管中定植的导管数分别为13.5根和24.1根;相对风险为0.56 [95%CI,0.36至0.89];P = 0.005),发生血流感染的可能性几乎低五倍(每100根导管中感染数分别为1.0例和4.7例;每1000导管日感染数分别为1.6例和7.6例;相对风险为0.21 [CI,0.03至0.95];P = 0.03)。在对照组中,8例与导管相关的血流感染由金黄色葡萄球菌、革兰氏阴性杆菌、肠球菌或念珠菌属引起;抗菌导管组未发生这些病原体感染(P = 0.003)。未观察到抗菌导管有不良反应,两组中从感染导管分离出的122株菌株在体外均未显示对氯己定 - 磺胺嘧啶银耐药。成本效益分析表明,如果一个机构无套囊中心静脉导管相关菌血症的发生率至少为每1000导管日3例感染,那么抗菌导管应具有成本效益。
氯己定 - 磺胺嘧啶银导管耐受性良好,可降低导管相关感染的发生率,延长无套囊中心静脉导管短期安全留置的时间,并应能节省成本。