Charalambous C, Swoboda S M, Dick J, Perl T, Lipsett P A
Manchester University School of Medicine, England.
Arch Surg. 1998 Nov;133(11):1241-6. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.133.11.1241.
To determine the risk factors and clinical impact of central line infections in critically ill surgical patients.
Retrospective study.
The surgical intensive care unit of a large tertiary care university hospital.
A total of 232 consecutive central line catheters sent for culture from patients in a surgical intensive care unit during 1996 and 1997. Catheters were sent for microbiologic analysis when the patient was clinically infected and the central line was a possible source.
None.
Risk factors associated and clinical impact of a positive catheter culture.
Of 232 consecutive catheters from 93 patients sent for microbiologic analysis, 114 catheters (49%) had no growth, 40 (17%) were colonized (<15 colonies), and 78 (34%) were considered infected (> or =15 colonies). Univariate analysis showed that site (internal jugular vs subclavian, P<.001), catheter use (monitoring > dialysis > fluid > nutrition, P=.006), placement in the operating room vs the intensive care unit (P=.02), and placement of a new catheter (> guide wire, > new site, P=.003) were all significant factors. Surprisingly, neither the number of lunmens nor the duration of the catheter in situ were predictors when a catheter was suspected and not proved infected compared with a suspected and proved catheter infection. In the multiple regression model, the placement of the catheter in the internal jugular position was the single most important predictor of a catheter infection (P<.001; odds ratio, 1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.41-2.37). The presence or absence of a specific clinical sign of infection was not predictive of a proved catheter infection. Eighty-six percent of patients had gram-positive bacteria identified on the culture, while the remaining patients had gram-negative bacteria or Candida identified. Of the catheter infections, 68% were monomicrobial, whereas 32% were polymicrobial. Of the catheters sent for microbiologic analysis, 209 (90%) had concurrent peripheral blood cultures for analysis. Nineteen (32%) with no growth from the catheter, and 14 (23%) of colonized catheters had concurrent bacteremia; all had another identifiable cause of infection. Twenty-seven (45%) of infected catheters had a concurrent bacteremia, and 9 of 27 had a second site positive for the same organism. Death related to the infection occurred in 15 patients, 2 in the first 72 hours and 13 in the following 14 days.
Central line infections remain an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Comprehensive review of hospital practices may show a directed focus for performance improvement practices. At our institution, internal jugular catheters have the highest rate of infection. This may suggest breaks in technique during catheter insertion or during catheter maintenance and care.
确定重症外科患者中心静脉导管感染的危险因素及临床影响。
回顾性研究。
一所大型三级护理大学医院的外科重症监护病房。
1996年至1997年期间,外科重症监护病房共有232根连续的中心静脉导管送检培养。当患者出现临床感染且中心静脉导管可能为感染源时,将导管送检进行微生物分析。
无。
导管培养阳性的相关危险因素及临床影响。
在送检微生物分析的93例患者的232根连续导管中,114根导管(49%)无细菌生长,40根(17%)为定植(<15个菌落),78根(34%)被认为感染(≥15个菌落)。单因素分析显示,置管部位(颈内静脉与锁骨下静脉,P<0.001)、导管用途(监测>透析>补液>营养,P = 0.006)、在手术室与重症监护病房置管(P = 0.02)以及置入新导管(>导丝,>新部位,P = 0.003)均为显著因素。令人惊讶的是,与疑似并证实导管感染相比,当怀疑导管感染但未证实时,管腔数量和导管留置时间均不是预测因素。在多元回归模型中,导管置于颈内静脉位置是导管感染的唯一最重要预测因素(P<0.001;比值比,1.83;95%置信区间[CI],1.41 - 2.37)。是否存在特定的感染临床体征不能预测已证实的导管感染。86%的患者培养出革兰阳性菌,其余患者培养出革兰阴性菌或念珠菌。在导管感染中,68%为单一微生物感染,32%为多微生物感染。在送检微生物分析的导管中,209根(90%)同时进行了外周血培养分析。19根(32%)导管无细菌生长,14根(23%)定植导管同时存在菌血症;所有这些患者均有其他可识别的感染原因。27根(45%)感染导管同时存在菌血症,其中27根中有9根在第二个部位发现相同微生物阳性。与感染相关的死亡发生在15例患者中:2例在最初72小时内,13例在随后14天内。
中心静脉导管感染仍然是发病和死亡的重要原因。对医院操作进行全面审查可能会发现改进操作的重点方向。在我们机构,颈内静脉导管感染率最高。这可能提示在导管插入或维护及护理过程中存在技术缺陷。