Single- versus triple-lumen central catheter-related sepsis: a prospective randomized study in a critically ill population

Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing clotting of extracorporeal circuits during continuous renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication amongst people who are critically ill, and it is associated with an increased risk of death. For people with severe AKI, continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT), which is delivered over 24 hours, is needed when they become haemodynamically unstable. When CKRT is interrupted due to clotting of the extracorporeal circuit, the delivered dose is decreased and thus leading to undertreatment.

OBJECTIVES

This review assessed the efficacy of non-pharmacological measures to maintain circuit patency in CKRT.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 January 2021 which includes records identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (parallel-group and cross-over studies), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs that examined non-pharmacological interventions to prevent clotting of extracorporeal circuits during CKRT.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three pairs of review authors independently extracted information including participants, interventions/comparators, outcomes, study methods, and risk of bias. The primary outcomes were circuit lifespan and death due to any cause at day 28. We used a random-effects model to perform quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). We assessed risk of bias in included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 20 studies involving 1143 randomised participants were included in the review. The methodological quality of the included studies was low, mainly due to the unclear randomisation process and blinding of the intervention. We found evidence on the following 11 comparisons: (i) continuous venovenous haemodialysis (CVVHD) versus continuous venovenous haemofiltration (CVVH) or continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration (CVVHDF); (ii) CVVHDF versus CVVH; (iii) higher blood flow (≥ 250 mL/minute) versus standard blood flow (< 250 mL/minute); (iv) AN69 membrane (AN69ST) versus other membranes; (v) pre-dilution versus post-dilution; (vi) a longer catheter (> 20 cm) placing the tip targeting the right atrium versus a shorter catheter (≤ 20 cm) placing the tip in the superior vena cava; (vii) surface-modified double-lumen catheter versus standard double-lumen catheter with identical geometry and flow design; (viii) single-site infusion anticoagulation versus double-site infusion anticoagulation; (ix) flat plate filter versus hollow fibre filter of the same membrane type; (x) a filter with a larger membrane surface area versus a smaller one; and (xi) a filter with more and shorter hollow fibre versus a standard filter of the same membrane type. Circuit lifespan was reported in 9 comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated that CVVHDF (versus CVVH: MD 10.15 hours, 95% CI 5.15 to 15.15; 1 study, 62 circuits), pre-dilution haemofiltration (versus post-dilution haemofiltration: MD 9.34 hours, 95% CI -2.60 to 21.29; 2 studies, 47 circuits; I² = 13%), placing the tip of a longer catheter targeting the right atrium (versus placing a shorter catheter targeting the tip in the superior vena cava: MD 6.50 hours, 95% CI 1.48 to 11.52; 1 study, 420 circuits), and surface-modified double-lumen catheter (versus standard double-lumen catheter: MD 16.00 hours, 95% CI 13.49 to 18.51; 1 study, 262 circuits) may prolong circuit lifespan. However, higher blood flow may not increase circuit lifespan (versus standard blood flow: MD 0.64, 95% CI -3.37 to 4.64; 2 studies, 499 circuits; I² = 70%). More and shorter hollow fibre filters (versus standard filters: MD -5.87 hours, 95% CI -10.18 to -1.56; 1 study, 6 circuits) may reduce circuit lifespan. Death from any cause was reported in four comparisons We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHD versus CVVH or CVVHDF, longer versus a shorter catheter, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters reduced death due to any cause, in very low certainty evidence. Recovery of kidney function was reported in three comparisons. We are uncertain whether CVVHDF versus CVVH, CVVHDF versus CVVH, or surface-modified double-lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters increased recovery of kidney function. Vascular access complications were reported in two comparisons. Low certainty evidence indicated using a longer catheter (versus a shorter catheter: RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.74) may reduce vascular access complications, however the use of surface-modified double lumen catheters versus standard double-lumen catheters may make little or no difference to vascular access complications.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of CVVHDF as compared with CVVH, pre-dilution haemofiltration, a longer catheter, and surface-modified double-lumen catheter may be useful in prolonging the circuit lifespan, while higher blood flow and more and shorter hollow fibre filter may reduce circuit life. The Overall, the certainty of evidence was assessed to be low to very low due to the small sample size of the included studies. Data from future rigorous and transparent research are much needed in order to fully understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions in preventing circuit coagulation amongst people with AKI receiving CKRT.

Central venous catheter-related infections in hematology and oncology: 2020 updated guidelines on diagnosis, management, and prevention by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

Cancer patients frequently require central venous catheters for therapy and parenteral nutrition and are at high risk of central venous catheter-related infections (CRIs). Moreover, CRIs prolong hospitalization, cause an excess in resource utilization and treatment cost, often delay anti-cancer treatment, and are associated with a significant increase in mortality in cancer patients. We therefore summoned a panel of experts by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) and updated our previous guideline on CRIs in cancer patients. After conducting systematic literature searches on PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane databases, video- and meeting-based consensus discussions were held. In the presented guideline, we summarize recommendations on definition, diagnosis, management, and prevention of CRIs in cancer patients including the grading of strength of recommendations and the respective levels of evidence. This guideline supports clinicians and researchers alike in the evidence-based decision-making in the management of CRIs in cancer patients.

Towards more efficient use of intravenous lumens in multi-infusion settings: development and evaluation of a multiplex infusion scheduling algorithm

BACKGROUND

Multi-drug intravenous (IV) therapy is one of the most common medical procedures used in intensive care units (ICUs), operating rooms, oncology wards and many other hospital departments worldwide. As drugs or their solvents are frequently chemically incompatible, many solutions must be administered through separate lumens. When the number of available lumens is too low to facilitate the safe administration of these solutions, additional (peripheral) IV catheters are often required, causing physical discomfort and increasing the risk for catheter related complications. Our objective was to develop and evaluate an algorithm designed to reduce the number of intravenous lumens required in multi-infusion settings by multiplexing the administration of various parenteral drugs and solutions.

METHODS

A multiplex algorithm was developed that schedules the alternating IV administration of multiple incompatible IV solutions through a single lumen, taking compatibility-related, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic constraints of the relevant drugs into account. The conventional scheduling procedure executed by ICU nurses was used for comparison. The number of lumens required by the conventional procedure (LCONV) and multiplex algorithm (LMX) were compared.

RESULTS

We used data from 175,993 ICU drug combinations, with 2251 unique combinations received by 2715 consecutive ICU patients. The mean ± SD number of simultaneous IV solutions was 2.8 ± 1.6. In 27% of all drug combinations, and 61% of the unique combinations the multiplex algorithm required fewer lumens (p < 0.001). With increasing LCONV, the reduction in number of lumens by the multiplex algorithm further increased (p < 0.001). In only 1% of cases multiplexing required > 3 lm, versus 12% using the conventional procedure.

CONCLUSION

The multiplex algorithm addresses a major issue that occurs in ICUs, operating rooms, oncology wards, and many other hospital departments where several incompatible drugs are infused through a restricted number of lumens. The multiplex algorithm allows for more efficient use of IV lumens compared to the conventional multi-infusion strategy.

Validity of surrogate endpoints assessing central venous catheter-related infection: evidence from individual- and study-level analyses

OBJECTIVES

The prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) has been an area of intense research, but the heterogeneity of endpoints used to define catheter infection makes the interpretation of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) problematic. The aim of this study was to determine the validity of different endpoints for central venous catheter infections.

DATA SOURCES

(a) Individual-catheter data were collected from 9428 catheters from four large RCTs; (b) study-level data from 70 RCTs were identified with a systematic search. Eligible studies were RCTs published between January 1987 and October 2018 investigating various interventions to reduce infections from short-term central venous catheters or short-term dialysis catheters. For each RCT the prevalence rates of CRBSI, quantitative catheter tip colonization, catheter-associated infection (CAI) and central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) were extracted for each randomized study arm.

METHODS

CRBSI was used as the gold-standard endpoint, for which colonization, CAI and CLABSI were evaluated as surrogate endpoints. Surrogate validity was assessed as (1) the individual partial coefficient of determination (individual-pR²) using individual catheter data; (2) the coefficient of determination (study-R²) from mixed-effect models regressing the therapeutic effect size of the surrogates on the effect size of CRBSI, using study-level data.

RESULTS

Colonization showed poor agreement with CRBSI at the individual-patient level (pR² = 0.33 95% CI 0.28-0.38) and poor capture at the study level (R² = 0.42, 95% CI 0.21-0.58). CAI showed good agreement with CRBSI at the individual-patient level (pR² = 0.80, 95% CI 0.76-0.83) and moderate capture at the study level (R² = 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-0.85). CLABSI showed poor agreement with CRBSI at the individual patient level (pR² = 0.34, 95% CI 0.23-0.46) and poor capture at the study level (R² = 0.28, 95% CI 0.07-0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

CAI is a moderate to good surrogate endpoint for CRBSI. Colonization and CLABSI do not reliably reflect treatment effects on CRBSI and are consequently more suitable for surveillance than for clinical effectiveness research.

Central Venous Access Devices (CVAD) in Pediatric Oncology Patients-A Single-Center Retrospective Study Over More Than 9 Years

Background: Central venous access devices (CVAD) provide important benefits in the management of oncological pediatric patients. However, these catheters are responsible for severe complications. Methods: In this context, we aimed to analyze all patients receiving a CVAD in the Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology of the University hospital of Mainz over a period of 9 years, focused on CVAD related complications. Data on demographics, as well as intraoperative and postoperative complications were extracted. Results: A total of 296 patients with a mean age 93.2 ± 62.4 months were analyzed. The majority suffered from leukemia (n = 91, 30.7%), lymphomas (n = 50, 16.9%), and brain tumors (n = 48, 16.2%). In 63 (21.3) patients, complications were observed. No death caused by complications of CVADs was found in our series. Catheter-related blood stream infections (BSI) (7.4%) were most prevalent, followed by dislodgements (5.4%), occlusions (2.7%), thrombosis (2.4%), and catheter leakage (2.4%). Insertion site infections were observed in three patients (1.0%). Fifty-nine percent of all patients with catheter-related BSI suffered from Leukemia. In patients with Catheter-related BSIs we detected the condition leukemia as the underlying disease as a risk factor compared to solid tumors as the underlying disease. Overall, totally implanted devices (ports) have a lower complication rate than tunneled catheter. Conclusion: Implantation of CVADs seems to be safe and reliable in this large pediatric patient cohort. Even if complications occur in the long-term management of CVADs, they can be treated successfully and long-term catheter survival rates are excellent.

Guideline for Prevention of Intravascular-Device–Related Infections

The “Guideline for Prevention of Intravascular Device-Related Infections” is designed to reduce the incidence of intravascular device-related infections by providing an over view of the evidence for recommendations considered prudent by consensus of Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisor y Committee (HICPAC) members. This two-part document updates and replaces the previously published Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) Guideline for Intravascular Infections (Am J Infect Control1983;11:183-199). Part I, “Intravascular Device-Related Infections: An Over view” discusses many of the issues and controversies in intravascular-device use and maintenance. These issues include definitions and diagnosis of catheter-related infection, appropriate barrier precautions during catheter insertion, inter vals for replacement of catheters, intravenous (IV) fluids and administration sets, catheter-site care, the role of specialized IV personnel, and the use of prophylactic antimi-crobials, flush solutions, and anticoagulants. Part II, “Recommendations for Prevention of Intravascular Device-Related Infections” provides consensus recommendations of the HICPAC for the prevention and control of intravascular device-related infections. A working draft of this document also was reviewed by experts in hospital infection control, internal medicine, pediatrics, and intravenous therapy. However, all recommendations contained in the guideline may not reflect the opinion of all reviewers.

Effect of Nurse Staffing and Antimicrobial-Impregnated Central Venous Catheters on the Risk for Bloodstream Infections in Intensive Care Units

Background:

Defining risk factors for central venous catheter (CVC)-associated bloodstream infections (BSIs) is critical to establishing prevention measures, especially for factors such as nurse staffing and antimicrobial-impregnated CVCs.

Methods:

We prospectively monitored CVCs, nurse staffing, and patient-related variables for CVC-associated BSIs among adults admitted to eight ICUs during 2 years.

Results:

A total of 240 CVC-associated BSIs (2.8%) were identified among 4,535 patients, representing 8,593 CVCs. Antimicrobial-impregnated CVCs reduced the risk for CVC-associated BSI only among patients whose CVC was used to administer total parenteral nutrition (TPN, 2.6 CVC-associated BSIs per 1,000 CVC-days vs no TPN, 7.5 CVC-associated BSIs per 1,000 CVC-days;P= .006). Among patients not receiving TPN, there was an increase in the risk of CVC-associated BSI in patients cared for by “float” nurses for more than 60% of the duration of the CVC. In multivariable analysis, risk factors for CVC-associated BSIs were the use of TPN in non-antimicrobial-impregnated CVCs (P= .0001), patient cared for by a float nurse for more than 60% of CVC-days (P= .0019), no antibiotics administered to the patient within 48 hours of insertion (P= .0001), and patient unarousable for 70% or more of the duration of the CVC (P= .0001). Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) were associated with a lower risk for CVC-associated BSI (P= .0001).

Conclusions:

Antimicrobial-impregnated CVCs reduced the risk of CVC-associated BSI by 66% in patients receiving TPN. Limiting the use of float nurses for ICU patients with CVCs and the use of PICCs may also reduce the risk of CVC-associated BSI.

Focus on peripherally inserted central catheters in critically ill patients

Venous access devices are of pivotal importance for an increasing number of critically ill patients in a variety of disease states and in a variety of clinical settings (emergency, intensive care, surgery) and for different purposes (fluids or drugs infusions, parenteral nutrition, antibiotic therapy, hemodynamic monitoring, procedures of dialysis/apheresis). However, healthcare professionals are commonly worried about the possible consequences that may result using a central venous access device (CVAD) (mainly, bloodstream infections and thrombosis), both peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and centrally inserted central catheters (CICCs). This review aims to discuss indications, insertion techniques, and care of PICCs in critically ill patients. PICCs have many advantages over standard CICCs. First of all, their insertion is easy and safe -due to their placement into peripheral veins of the arm- and the advantage of a central location of catheter tip suitable for all osmolarity and pH solutions. Using the ultrasound-guidance for the PICC insertion, the risk of hemothorax and pneumothorax can be avoided, as well as the possibility of primary malposition is very low. PICC placement is also appropriate to avoid post-procedural hemorrhage in patients with an abnormal coagulative state who need a CVAD. Some limits previously ascribed to PICCs (i.e., low flow rates, difficult central venous pressure monitoring, lack of safety for radio-diagnostic procedures, single-lumen) have delayed their start up in the intensive care units as common practice. Though, the recent development of power-injectable PICCs overcomes these technical limitations and PICCs have started to spread in critical care settings. Two important take-home messages may be drawn from this review. First, the incidence of complications varies depending on venous accesses and healthcare professionals should be aware of the different clinical performance as well as of the different risks associated with each type of CVAD (CICCs or PICCs). Second, an inappropriate CVAD choice and, particularly, an inadequate insertion technique are relevant-and often not recognized-potential risk factors for complications in critically ill patients. We strongly believe that all healthcare professionals involved in the choice, insertion or management of CVADs in critically ill patients should know all potential risk factors of complications. This knowledge may minimize complications and guarantee longevity to the CVAD optimizing the risk/benefit ratio of CVAD insertion and use. Proper management of CVADs in critical care saves lines and lives. Much evidence from the medical literature and from the clinical practice supports our belief that, compared to CICCs, the so-called power-injectable peripherally inserted central catheters are a good alternative choice in critical care.

Central venous catheter-related infections in hematology and oncology: 2012 updated guidelines on diagnosis, management and prevention by the Infectious Diseases Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients are at increased risk for central venous catheter-related infections (CRIs). Thus, a comprehensive, practical and evidence-based guideline on CRI in patients with malignancies is warranted.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A panel of experts by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) has developed a guideline on CRI in cancer patients. Literature searches of the PubMed, Medline and Cochrane databases were carried out and consensus discussions were held.

RESULTS

Recommendations on diagnosis, management and prevention of CRI in cancer patients are made, and the strength of the recommendation and the level of evidence are presented.

CONCLUSION

This guideline is an evidence-based approach to the diagnosis, management and prevention of CRI in cancer patients.

Diagnosis of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection without catheter removal: A prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) resulting from bacterial colonisation of an intravascular catheter are the leading cause of nosocomially acquired sepsis contributing significantly towards in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Suspicion of central venous CRBSI leads frequently to catheter withdrawal but not all infection requires the catheter to be withdrawn; therefore, diagnosis of central venous CRBSI without catheter withdrawal is a necessity.

METHODS

The study was prospectively performed in a cohort of adult patients who had short term central venous catheter use. The samples collected from each patients included, skin swab from insertion site, swab from catheter hub, paired blood samples from catheter and from the peripheral vein for quantitative blood culture collected within 15 min of each other and catheter-tip sample by cutting off the tip (distal 5-cm segment). All samples were processed immediately.

RESULTS

50 episodes of clinical sepsis involving 100 patients occurred in the study population. 28 of the episodes were confirmed as CR-BSI (56%). Blood culture from the central venous catheter had the highest sensitivity (71.43%) and the greatest negative predictive value (86.67%). However, the peripheral blood culture was most specific and had the highest positive predictive value (specificity75%; positive predictive value 50%). The most accurate technique was differential quantitative blood cultures (accuracy 72%), followed by semiquantitative superficial cultures (accuracy 68%), although there were no statistically significant differences between values.

CONCLUSION

We recommend combining semiquantitative cultures and peripheral blood cultures to screen for CR-BSI, leaving differential quantitative blood cultures as a confirmatory and more specific technique.

epic3: national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England

National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England were originally commissioned by the Department of Health and developed during 1998-2000 by a nurse-led multi-professional team of researchers and specialist clinicians. Following extensive consultation, they were first published in January 2001(1) and updated in 2007.(2) A cardinal feature of evidence-based guidelines is that they are subject to timely review in order that new research evidence and technological advances can be identified, appraised and, if shown to be effective for the prevention of HCAI, incorporated into amended guidelines. Periodically updating the evidence base and guideline recommendations is essential in order to maintain their validity and authority. The Department of Health commissioned a review of new evidence and we have updated the evidence base for making infection prevention and control recommendations. A critical assessment of the updated evidence indicated that the epic2 guidelines published in 2007 remain robust, relevant and appropriate, but some guideline recommendations required adjustments to enhance clarity and a number of new recommendations were required. These have been clearly identified in the text. In addition, the synopses of evidence underpinning the guideline recommendations have been updated. These guidelines (epic3) provide comprehensive recommendations for preventing HCAI in hospital and other acute care settings based on the best currently available evidence. National evidence-based guidelines are broad principles of best practice that need to be integrated into local practice guidelines and audited to reduce variation in practice and maintain patient safety. Clinically effective infection prevention and control practice is an essential feature of patient protection. By incorporating these guidelines into routine daily clinical practice, patient safety can be enhanced and the risk of patients acquiring an infection during episodes of health care in NHS hospitals in England can be minimised.

Risk factors for the development of catheter-related bloodstream infections in patients receiving home parenteral nutrition

BACKGROUND

Risk factors for development of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) were studied in 125 adults and 18 children who received home parenteral nutrition (HPN).

METHODS

Medical records from a national home care pharmacy were reviewed for all patients that had HPN infused at least twice weekly for a minimum of two years from January 1, 2006-December 31, 2011. Infection and risk factor data were collected during this time period on all patients although those patients who received HPN for a longer period had data collected since initiation of HPN.

RESULTS

In adults, 331 central venous catheters (CVCs) were placed. Total catheter years were 1157. Median CVC dwell time was 730 days. In children, there were 53 CVCs placed. Total catheter years were 113.1. Median CVC dwell time was 515 days. There were 147 CRBSIs (0.13/catheter year;0.35/1000 catheter days). In children there were 33 CRBSIs (0.29/catheter year;0.80/1000 days; P < .001 versus adults). In adults, univariate analysis showed use of subcutaneous infusion ports instead of tunneled catheters (P = .001), multiple lumen catheters (P = .001), increased frequency of lipid emulsion infusion (P = .001), obtaining blood from the CVC (P < 0.001), and infusion of non-PN medications via the CVC (P < .001) were significant risk factors for CRBSI. Increased PN frequency was associated with increased risk of CRBSI (P = .001) in children, but not in adults. Catheter disinfection with povidone-iodine was more effective than isopropyl alcohol alone. There were insufficient patients to evaluate chlorhexidine-containing regimens.

CONCLUSION

Numerous risk factors for CRBSI were identified for which simple and current countermeasures already exist.

Ten years of mechanical complications of central venous catheterization in trauma patients

The study purpose was to determine the incidence of mechanical complications (MC) associated with central venous catheterization (CVC) and to evaluate their impact on outcomes. This was a retrospective review of trauma morbidity and mortality records at a Level I trauma center (1999 to 2009). Demographics and outcomes were extracted for all trauma patients with CVC. Patients developing MC were compared with those who did not. Four thousand eight hundred eighteen lines were placed in 2935 patients. Of these, 1.5 per cent (n = 73) had MC. A total of 64.4 per cent (n = 47) were pneumothoraces followed by arterial cannulation at 8.2 per cent (n = 6) and thrombosis at 6.8 per cent (n = 5). The rate of MC by access site was: subclavian 1.8 per cent (n = 52), internal jugular 1.2 per cent (n = 10), and femoral 0.3 per cent (n = 3) (P value for trend = 0.001). Change in management was required in 31.5 per cent (n = 23). Number of lines (P < 0.001), Injury Severity Score (P < 0.001), body mass index less than 20 kg/m(2) (P = 0.036), and chest Abbreviated Injury Score greater than 3 (P = 0.034) were significant predictors of MC. Patients with MC had a longer intensive care unit length of stay (18.8 ± 25.7 vs 11.4 ± 13.3; adjusted odds ratio, 5.75; 95% confidence interval, 2.24-9.25; P = 0.001). Incidence of MC was 1.5 per cent. Complications were clinically significant in 31.5 per cent and resulted in longer intensive care unit stays.

Prevention of central venous catheter-related infection: update

Central venous catheters (CVCs) are an essential part of modern-day healthcare, but infections associated with these devices continue to cause significant morbidity and mortality. There are many approaches for the prevention of CVC-related infection and these are outlined in national guidelines. The Department of Health Saving Lives campaign has developed a care-bundle for the prevention of CVC-related infections that focuses on the fundamental actions to be undertaken during the catheter insertion process and ongoing care. If the rate of catheter-related infection remains high despite the implementation of these infection prevention strategies, the use of novel antimicrobial technologies and practices may be considered. These include CVCs that contain antimicrobial agents, such as antiseptics or antibiotics, needleless intravenous (IV) access devices coated with silver and/or chlorhexidine, IV dressings incorporating chlorhexidine, and the use of antimicrobial catheter lock solutions, such as antibiotics, chelators or ethanol. This article outlines the different types of CVCs available, the risk of infection associated with their use and established and novel measures for prevention of these infections.

Hemodialysis catheters with citrate locking in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury treated with intermittent online hemofiltration or hemodialysis

The purpose of the study was to compare the long-term catheter-related complications associated with temporary untunneled hemodialysis catheters, locked with citrate in the interdialysis period, inserted in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury, between different catheter insertion sites (femoral vs. jugular and subclavian) and catheter types (single-lumen [SL] vs. double-lumen [DL]). In a retrospective clinical study, the long-term catheter-related complications in 290 critically ill patients treated with intermittent high-volume online hemofiltration or hemodialysis between December 2004 and January 2008 were analyzed. Among 534 inserted catheters, 493 (92.3%) were femoral, 29 (5.4%) jugular, and 12 (2.3%) subclavian; 304 (56.9%) were SL and 230 (43.1%) were DL. There were 125 (20.3/1000 catheter days [c.d.]) thrombotic complications, while infectious complications were exceptionally rare, that is, only 13 (2.1/1000 c.d.), of which 10 (1.6/1000 c.d.) were possible catheter-related bloodstream infections and 3 (0.5/1000 c.d.) exit-site infections. The incidence rate of all thrombotic complications was significantly lower in all jugular and subclavian vs. all femoral catheters (7.7/1000 c.d. vs. 21.8/1000 c.d., P = 0.01), and in all SL vs. DL catheters (11.4/1000 c.d. vs. 32.2/1000 c.d., P < 0.001). The incidence rate of any possible catheter-related bloodstream and exit-site infections was not significantly different in all jugular and subclavian vs. all femoral catheters, neither in femoral SL vs. DL catheters. The major long-term catheter-related complications were thrombotic, and significantly more frequent in DL vs. SL catheters. Infectious complications were exceptionally rare, most probably due to the strict catheter care protocol, as well as the routine use of a citrate catheter lock and antibiotic ointment at the catheter exit-site.

Catheter-related bloodstream infection

Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CR-BSIs) are a common, frequently preventable complication of central venous catheterization. CR-BSIs can be prevented by strict attention to insertion and maintenance of central venous catheters and removing unneeded catheters as soon as possible. Antiseptic- or antibiotic-impregnated catheters are also an effective tool to prevent infections. The diagnosis of CR-BSI is made largely based on culture results. CR-BSIs should always be treated with antibiotics, and except in rare circumstances the infected catheter needs to be removed.

Catheter-related bloodstream infections in intensive care units: a systematic review with meta-analysis

AIM

This paper is a report of a systematic review and meta-analysis of strategies, other than antimicrobial coated catheters, hypothesized to reduce risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections and catheter colonization in the intensive care unit setting.

BACKGROUND

Catheter-related bloodstream infections occur at a rate of 5 per 1000 catheter days in the intensive care unit setting and cause substantial mortality and excess cost. Reducing risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections among intensive care unit patients will save costs, reduce length of stay, and improve outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies published between January 1985 and February 2007 was carried out using the keywords 'catheterization - central venous' with combinations of infection*, prevention* and bloodstream*. All included studies were screened by two reviewers, a validated data extraction instrument was used and data collection was completed by two blinded independent reviewers. Risk ratios for catheter-related bloodstream infections and catheter colonization were estimated with 95% confidence intervals for each study. Results from studies of similar interventions were pooled using meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were included in the review. The strategies that reduced catheter colonization included insertion of central venous catheters in the subclavian vein rather than other sites, use of alternate skin disinfection solutions before catheter insertion and use of Vitacuff in combination with polymyxin, neomycin and bacitracin ointment. Strategies to reduce catheter-related bloodstream infection included staff education multifaceted infection control programmes and performance feedback.

CONCLUSION

A range of interventions may reduce risks of catheter-related bloodstream infection, in addition to antimicrobial catheters.

Guidelines on the insertion and management of central venous access devices in adults

Central venous access devices are used in many branched of medicine where venous access is required for either long-term or a short-term care. These guidelines review the types of access devices available and make a number of major recommendations. Their respective advantages and disadvantages in various clinical settings are outlined. Patient care prior to, and immediately following insertion is discussed in the context of possible complications and how these are best avoided. There is a section addressing long-term care of in-dwelling devices. Techniques of insertion and removal are reviewed and management of the problems which are most likely to occur following insertion including infection, misplacement and thrombosis are discussed. Care of patients with coagulopathies is addressed and there is a section addressing catheter-related problems.

Central venous catheterization

OBJECTIVE

To provide current information related to central venous catheterization.

DESIGN

Review of literature relevant to central venous catheterization and its indications, insertion techniques, and prevention of complications.

RESULTS

Central venous catheterization can be lifesaving but is associated with complication rates of approximately 15%. Operator experience, familiarity with the advantages and disadvantages of the various catheterization sites, and strict attention to detail during insertion help in reducing mechanical complications associated with catheterization. Strict aseptic technique and proper catheter maintenance decrease the frequency of catheter-related infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate catheter and site selection, sufficient operator experience, careful technique, and proper catheter maintenance with removal as soon as possible are associated with optimal outcome.

epic2: National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England

National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England were commissioned by the Department of Health (DH) and developed during 1998-2000 by a nurse-led multi-professional team of researchers and specialist clinicians. Following extensive consultation, they were published in January 2001. These guidelines describe the precautions healthcare workers should take in three areas: standard principles for preventing HCAI, which include hospital environmental hygiene, hand hygiene, the use of personal protective equipment, and the safe use and disposal of sharps; preventing infections associated with the use of short-term indwelling urethral catheters; and preventing infections associated with central venous catheters. The evidence for these guidelines was identified by multiple systematic reviews of experimental and non-experimental research and expert opinion as reflected in systematically identified professional, national and international guidelines, which were formally assessed by a validated appraisal process. In 2003, we developed complementary national guidelines for preventing HCAI in primary and community care on behalf of the National Collaborating Centre for Nursing and Supportive Care (National Institute for Healthand Clinical Excellence). A cardinal feature of evidence-based guidelines is that they are subject to timely review in order that new research evidence and technological advances can be identified, appraised and, if shown to be effective in preventing HCAI, incorporated into amended guidelines. Periodically updating the evidence base and guideline recommendations is essential in order to maintain their validity and authority. Consequently, the DH commissioned a review of new evidence published following the last systematic reviews. We have now updated the evidence base for making infection prevention and control recommendations. A critical assessment of the updated evidence indicated that the original epic guidelines published in 2001 remain robust, relevant and appropriate but that adjustments need to be made to some guideline recommendations following a synopsis of the evidence underpinning the guidelines. These updated national guidelines (epic2) provide comprehensive recommendations for preventing HCAI in hospitals and other acute care settings based on the best currently available evidence. Because this is not always the best possible evidence, we have included a suggested agenda for further research in each section of the guidelines. National evidence-based guidelines are broad principles of best practice which need to be integrated into local practice guidelines. To monitor implementation, we have suggested key audit criteria for each section of recommendations. Clinically effective infection prevention and control practice is an essential feature of protecting patients. By incorporating these guidelines into routine daily clinical practice, patient safety can be enhanced and the risk of patients acquiring an infection during episodes of healthcare in NHS hospitals in England can be minimised.

Specific topics and complications of parenteral nutrition

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Total parenteral nutrition (TPN) has proven a tremendous advance in all disciplines in medicine but itself introduces a spectrum of possible complications related to both the parenteral nutritional solution as well as the technique of intravenous delivery. Our aim is to review the specific complications of TPN.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This article presents a critical literature review of relevant topics in TPN-related complications-metabolic, infections, and nutrition related.

RESULTS

Special emphasis focuses on complications of TPN arising from thrombosis or infectious sequelae related to the central venous catheterization and metabolic complications involving the kidneys, bones, liver, and biliary tract.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness and surveillance of TPN-related complications can prevent, potentially, some of these complications related to parenteral nutritional support.

The risk of bloodstream infection in adults with different intravascular devices: a systematic review of 200 published prospective studies

OBJECTIVE

To better understand the absolute and relative risks of bloodstream Infection (BSI) associated with the various types of intravascular devices (IVDs), we analyzed 200 published studies of adults In which every device in the study population was prospectively evaluated for evidence of associated infection and microbiologically based criteria were used to define IVD-related BSI.

METHODS

English-language reports of prospective studies of adults published between January 1, 1966, and July 1, 2005, were identified by MEDLINE search using the following general search strategy: bacteremla [Medical Subject Heading, MeSH] OR septicemia [MeSH] OR bloodstream Infection AND the specific type of intravascular device (e.g., central venous port). Mean rates of IVD-related BSI were calculated from pooled data for each type of device and expressed as BSIs per 100 IVDs (%) and per 1000 IVD days.

RESULTS

Point incidence rates of IVD-related BSI were lowest with peripheral Intravenous catheters (0.1%, 0.5 per 1000 IVD-days) and midline catheters (0.4%, 0.2 per 1000 catheter-days). Far higher rates were seen with short-term noncuffed and nonmedicated central venous catheters (CVCs) (4.4%, 2.7 per 1000 catheter-days). Arterial catheters used for hemodynamic monitoring (0.8%, 1.7 per 1000 catheter-days) and peripherally inserted central catheters used in hospitalized patients (2.4%, 2.1 per 1000 catheter-days) posed risks approaching those seen with short-term conventional CVCs used in the Intensive care unit. Surgically implanted long-term central venous devices--cuffed and tunneled catheters (22.5%, 1.6 per 1000 IVD-days) and central venous ports (3.6%, 0.1 per 1000 IVD-days)--appear to have high rates of Infection when risk Is expressed as BSIs per 100 IVDs but actually pose much lower risk when rates are expressed per 1000 IVD-days. The use of cuffed and tunneled dual lumen CVCs rather than noncuffed, nontunneled catheters for temporary hemodlalysis and novel preventive technologies, such as CVCs with anti-infective surfaces, was associated with considerably lower rates of catheter-related BSI.

CONCLUSIONS

Expressing risk of IVD-related BSI per 1000 IVD-days rather than BSIs per 100 IVDs allows for more meaningful estimates of risk. These data, based on prospective studies In which every IVD in the study cohort was analyzed for evidence of infection by microbiologically based criteria, show that all types of IVDs pose a risk of IVD-related BSI and can be used for benchmarking rates of infection caused by the various types of IVDs In use at the present time. Since almost all the national effort and progress to date to reduce the risk of IVD-related Infection have focused on short-term noncuffed CVCs used in Intensive care units, Infection control programs must now strive to consistently apply essential control measures and preventive technologies with all types of IVDs.

Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters Are Not Superior to Central Venous Catheters in the Acute Care of Surgical Patients on the Ward

BACKGROUND

Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) have supplanted central venous catheters (CVC) for the administration of intravenous antibiotics and total parenteral nutrition to patients in our hospital. From the literature, it appears that this change has occurred in a number of other surgical units. Accounting for the change are the expected advantages of low complication rates at insertion, prolonged use without complications and interruption, and cost- and time-savings.

METHODS

We have proceeded with a review of the literature to understand and justify this change in practice. Our hypothesis was that the routine adoption of PICC instead of CVC for the acute care of surgical patients has occurred in the absence of strong scientific evidence. Our aim was to compare the associated infectious, thrombotic, phlebitic, and other common complications, as well as PICC and CVC durability. Articles concerning various aspects of PICC- and CVC-related complications in the acute care of adult patients were selected from the literature. Studies were excluded when they primarily addressed the use of long-term catheters, outpatient care, and pediatric patients. Data were extracted from 48 papers published between 1979 and 2004.

RESULTS

Our results show that infectious complications do not significantly differ between PICC and CVC. Thrombotic complications appear to be more significant with PICC and to occur early after catheterization. Phlebitic complications accounted for premature catheter removal in approximately 6% of PICC. Finally, prospective data suggest that approximately 40% of PICC will have to be removed before completion of therapy, possibly more often and earlier than CVC.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that there is no clear evidence that PICC is superior to CVC in acute care settings. Each approach offers its own advantages and a different profile of complications. Therefore, the choice of central venous access should be individualized for surgical patients on the ward. More comparative prospective studies are needed to document the advantages of PICC over CVC.

Infection control issues in central venous catheter care

Central venous catheters (CVCs) are now a routine part of patient management in the intensive care unit (ICU). Over time, a vast amount of literature associated with the use and care of CVCs has accumulated. The purpose of this article is to discuss the literature associated with the care of these devices in a narrative format. Although particular attention is paid to infection control issues, other fundamental areas such as catheter design, dressings, line changing and post insertion management are also discussed. The article goes on to look at the future of CVC design and concludes with an analysis of future developments related to CVCs.

Diagnosis of infection in sepsis: An evidence-based review

OBJECTIVE

In 2003, critical care and infectious disease experts representing 11 international organizations developed management guidelines for the diagnosis of infection in sepsis that would be of practical use for the bedside clinician, under the auspices of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, an international effort to increase awareness and improve outcome in severe sepsis.

DESIGN

The process included a modified Delphi method, a consensus conference, several subsequent smaller meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee.

METHODS

The modified Delphi methodology used for grading recommendations built on a 2001 publication sponsored by the International Sepsis Forum. We undertook a systematic review of the literature graded along five levels to create recommendation grades from A to E, with A being the highest grade. Pediatric considerations to contrast adult and pediatric management are in the article by Parker et al. on p. S591.

CONCLUSIONS

Obtaining a precise bacteriological diagnosis before starting antibiotic therapy is, when possible, of paramount importance for the success of therapeutic strategy during sepsis. Two to three blood cultures should be performed, preferably from a peripheral vein, without interval between samples to avoid delaying therapy. A quantitative approach is preferred in most cases when possible, in particular for catheter-related infections and ventilator-associated pneumonia. Diagnosing community-acquired pneumonia is complex, and a diagnostic algorithm is proposed. Appropriate samples are indicated during soft tissue and intraabdominal infections, but cultures obtained through the drains are discouraged.

Colonization and bloodstream infection with single- versus multi-lumen central venous catheters: a quantitative systematic review

There is a controversy as to whether the number of lumens in the central venous catheters may impact the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection. We performed a systematic search (MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, HealthSTAR/Ovid healthstar, bibliographies, any language, to April, 2003) for full reports on randomized comparisons of single-lumen and multi-lumen catheters. Trials had to report on dichotomous data of catheter colonization or bloodstream infection. Meta-analyses were performed using a fixed effect model. Data were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and number-needed-to-treat (NNT) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Five randomized trials (1987-1995) with data on 255 single-lumen and 275 multi-lumen catheters were analyzed. Average insertion times were 8 to 21 days with multi-lumen catheters and 9 to 24 days with single-lumen catheters. In 4 trials, 23 of 176 (13.1%) multi-lumen and 26 of 177 (14.7%) single-lumen catheters were colonized (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.49-1.72). In 5 trials, bloodstream infection occurred with 23 of 275 (8.4%) multi-lumen and with 8 of 255 (3.1%) single-lumen catheters (OR, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.24-5.37; NNT, 19; 95% CI, 11-75). For every 20 single-lumen catheters inserted, one bloodstream infection will be avoided that would have occurred had multi-lumen catheters been used. The risk of catheter colonization is not decreased. Although these conclusions are based on limited data, single-lumen catheters should be used whenever feasible.

Do Simultaneous Bilateral Tunneled Infusion Catheters in Patients Undergoing Bone Marrow Transplantation Increase Catheter-related Complications?

PURPOSE

Secure venous access with multiple lumens is necessary for the care of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients. The outcomes associated with simultaneous bilateral tunneled internal jugular infusion catheter placement in the HSCT recipient population were investigated in an attempt to determine whether simultaneous introduction of these catheters compounds or magnifies the risks (infection, venous thrombosis) associated with tunneled catheters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing HSCT and receiving bilateral tunneled infusion catheters in a single procedure were identified using a quality assurance data base. Medical records for the duration of catheterization were reviewed; 43 patients were included in the study (mean age, 42 years; range, 22-56). Diagnoses included acute lymphocytic leukemia (n = 4), acute myelogenous leukemia (n = 8), aplastic anemia (n = 2), chronic myelogenous leukemia (n = 17), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (n = 1), Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 1), myelodysplasia (n = 4), myelofibrosis (n = 2), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 4). Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was performed to determine differences in infection rates between dual- and triple-lumen catheters.

RESULTS

Forty-three pairs of catheters were placed. All met venous access needs for HSCT recipient care. Complete follow-up was achieved for 77 of 87 (89%) catheters. The overall infection rate was 0.25 per 100 catheter-days. The rate was 0.19 and 0.33 for dual- and triple-lumen catheters, respectively (P =.15). Mechanical failure did not differ between catheter types (dual: 0.14 episodes per 100 days, triple: 0.05 per 100 days, P =.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral multilumen tunneled infusion catheter placement in a single procedure using imaging guidance is safe with acceptable outcomes and meets venous access needs for HSCT. There is a trend toward higher infection rates, with more lumens and more mechanical failure with dual-lumen catheters.

Rates of infection for single-lumen versus multilumen central venous catheters: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Since the introduction of multilumen central venous catheters two decades ago, there has been controversy whether the additional lumens place patients with these catheters at higher risk for infection. Our objective was to determine the risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) and catheter colonization in multilumen catheters compared with single-lumen catheters.

DATA SOURCE

Studies were identified by a computerized search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Current Contents, and PREMEDLINE databases and by review of bibliographies and expert consultation. Studies comparing the prevalence of CRBSI or catheter colonization among single-, double-, and triple-lumen central venous catheters were included. We excluded studies if they included central venous catheters that were long-term, cuffed, tunneled, or coated with antibiotic or antiseptic agents.

DATA ABSTRACTION

Two independent reviewers abstracted data on: 1) risk factors for CRBSI and colonization, 2) outcome definitions used, 3) the absolute prevalence of CRBSI and catheter colonization, and 4) study design and quality.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 15 studies met inclusion criteria. Summary odds ratios were calculated using a random-effects model. Although CRBSI was more common in multilumen catheters (summary odds ratios, 2.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-4.66), catheter colonization was not (summary odds ratios, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-3.47). Tests for heterogeneity, however, suggested substantial variation by study. When only studies of higher quality were included, multilumen catheters were found not to be associated with a significant increase in CRBSI prevalence (summary odds ratios, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-3.41).

CONCLUSIONS

Multilumen central venous catheters may be associated with a slightly higher risk of infection when compared with single-lumen catheters; however, this relationship diminishes when only high-quality studies that control for patient differences are considered. The slight increase in infectious risk when using multilumen catheters is likely offset by their improved convenience, thereby justifying the continued use of multilumen vascular catheters.

A prospective, randomized study in critically ill patients using the Oligon Vantex® catheter

Microbial colonization and the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CR-BSI) associated with Oligon Vantex silver central venous catheters (CVC) in critically ill patients were determined. A prospective, randomized, controlled 17-month trial was carried out in an intensive care unit (ICU). All patients requiring a triple-lumen CVC for four days or longer were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive a standard polyurethane CVC or an Oligon Vantex silver CVC. Before removal of the catheter either due to discharge from the ICU or suspected infection, blood for cultures was taken via the CVC and a peripheral site. Skin and hub swabs and catheter-tips were also cultured. Two hundred and six catheters, 103 in both groups, were evaluated. In the control group (CG) 45/103 (44%) and in the silver group (SG) 30/103 (29%) were colonized or had a CR-BSI (P=0.04). The SG was less likely to be colonized than the CG when the catheter remained in situ for eight days or less (P=0.03) or over 15 days (P=0.01); a second or subsequent catheter was present in the same patient (P=0.002), or if the CVC was placed in the internal jugular vein (P=0.05). Multivariate logistic-regression showed predisposing factors for catheter colonization were jugular and femoral sites, second or subsequent catheter, and being a member of the CG. CR-BSI occurred in five cases (four in CG). Rates of CR-BSI per 1000 catheter-days in the CG were 2.8 and in the SG, 0.8 (P<0.001). The Oligon Vantex silver catheter reduced the incidence of catheter-colonization and may decrease the risk of CR-BSI.

A multicenter, prospective, randomized, comparative evaluation of dual- versus triple-lumen catheters for hemodialysis and apheresis in 485 patients

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to compare a new temporary triple-lumen catheter (TLC) for dialysis that has a third lumen devoted to fluid and medication administration or blood sampling with a marketed dual-lumen catheter (DLC).

METHODS

Four hundred eighty-five patients referred for acute hemodialysis or apheresis were randomly assigned to either a TLC or DLC in a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial.

RESULTS

Analysis of blood flow rates was completed on 464 patients (228 patients, DLC; 236 patients, TLC) with a total of 1,681 hemodialysis (808 treatments, DLC; 873 treatments, TLC) and 82 apheresis treatments (37 treatments, DLC; 45 treatments, TLC). During hemodialysis, a median achieved flow rate (AFR) of 267 mL/min was realized for both groups (P = 0.58). During apheresis, a median AFR of 72.5 mL/min (range, 50 to 150 mL/min) was achieved in the DLC group, and 87 mL/min (range, 60 to 150 mL/min), in the TLC group (P = 0.14). Three hundred ninety-three patients (193 patients, DLC; 200 patients, TLC) had blood and catheter tip cultures performed on removal, and catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) status was determined. Thirty-one patients (7.9%) had a CRBSI: 16 patients (8.3%), DLC; and 15 patients (7.5%), TLC (P= 0.77). Incidence densities of CRBSI were 12.4/1,000 DLC-days and 10.2/1,000 TLC-days (P = 0.59). The CRBSI incidence of 18.2/1,000 catheter-days for femoral sites was significantly greater than the 7/1,000 catheter-days for jugular sites (P = 0.02) and 6.6/1,000 catheter-days for combined jugular and subclavian sites (P = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, antibiotic use was the only factor related to CRBSI (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.12 to 0.76). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of other complications between the 2 catheters.

CONCLUSION

Results show that the new TLC is similar to the marketed DLC.

A review of risk factors for catheter-related bloodstream infection caused by percutaneously inserted, noncuffed central venous catheters: implications for preventive strategies

Strategies for preventing central venous catheter (CVC)-related bloodstream infection are most likely to be effective if guided by an understanding of the risk factors associated with these infections. In this critical review of published studies of risk factors for CVC-related bloodstream infection that were prospective and used multivariable techniques of data analysis or that were randomized trials of a preventive measure, a significantly increased risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection was associated with inexperience of the operator and nurse-to-patient ratio in the intensive care unit, catheter insertion with less than maximal sterile barriers, placement of a CVC in the internal jugular or femoral vein rather than subclavian vein, placement in an old site by guidewire exchange, heavy colonization of the insertion site or contamination of a catheter hub, and duration of CVC placement > 7 days. Prospective studies or randomized trials of control measures focusing on these risk factors have been shown to reduce risk significantly: formal training in CVC insertion and care, use of maximal sterile barriers at insertion, use of chlorhexidine rather than povidone-iodine for cutaneous antisepsis, applying a topical anti-infective cream or ointment or a chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing to the insertion site, and the use of novel catheters with an anti-infective surface or a contamination resistant hub. Better prospective studies of sufficient size to address all potential risk factors, including insertion site and hub colonization, insertion technique, and details of follow-up care, would enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of CVC-related bloodstream infection and guide efforts to develop more effective strategies for prevention.

Complications of central venous catheters: internal jugular versus subclavian access--a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To test whether complications happen more often with the internal jugular or the subclavian central venous approach.

DATA SOURCE

Systematic search (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, bibliographies) up to June 30, 2000, with no language restriction.

STUDY SELECTION

Reports on prospective comparisons of internal jugular vs. subclavian catheter insertion, with dichotomous data on complications.

DATA EXTRACTION

No valid randomized trials were found. Seventeen prospective comparative trials with data on 2,085 jugular and 2,428 subclavian catheters were analyzed. Meta-analyses were performed with relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), using fixed and random effects models.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In six trials (2,010 catheters), there were significantly more arterial punctures with jugular catheters compared with subclavian (3.0% vs. 0.5%, RR 4.70 [95% CI, 2.05-10.77]). In six trials (1,299 catheters), there were significantly less malpositions with the jugular access (5.3% vs. 9.3%, RR 0.66 [0.44-0.99]). In three trials (707 catheters), the incidence of bloodstream infection was 8.6% with the jugular access and 4.0% with the subclavian access (RR 2.24 [0.62-8.09]). In ten trials (3,420 catheters), the incidence of hemato- or pneumothorax was 1.3% vs. 1.5% (RR 0.76 [0.43--1.33]). In four trials (899), the incidence of vessel occlusion was 0% vs. 1.2% (RR 0.29 [0.07-1.33]).

CONCLUSIONS

There are more arterial punctures but less catheter malpositions with the internal jugular compared with the subclavian access. There is no evidence of any difference in the incidence of hemato- or pneumothorax and vessel occlusion. Data on bloodstream infection are scarce. These data are from nonrandomized studies; selection bias cannot be ruled out. In terms of risk, the data most likely represent a best case scenario. For rational decision-making, randomized trials are needed.

Catheter-related bloodstream infections in HIV-infected patients

Bloodstream infections (BSI) constitute a significant public health problem and represent an important cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients, with an approximate incidence of one episode per hundred hospital admissions. Studies on BSI in HIV+ patients have identified central venous catheters (CVC) as a risk factor, with an attributable mortality rate of 10-20%. The long-term CVC-related infection risk appeared to be 5 to 10-fold higher with respect to the infection rates among HIV- patients. CVC associated infection rate ranges from 1.3 to 12 infections per 1,000 catheter-days. Staphylococcus aureus is the most common etiologic agent causative of CVC-related BSI, likely the result of the high skin and nasal carriage of this organism among HIV+ patients, mostly intravenous drug users. Coagulase-negative staphylococci are also frequently identified as cause of CVC-related BSI, likely the result of breaches in infection control measures and in antiseptic technique during CVC management. Treating bacteremia without catheter removal would be optimal, but the reported efficacy of systemic antibiotic therapy alone is only 25-32%. Conversely, recent studies have shown that, using an antibiotic-lock procedure, up to 90% of HIV-infected and uninfected patients achieved complete eradication of catheter-related BSIs without catheter removal. Clinical trials using new materials such as covalently linked heparin on the CVC surface, electrically charged CVC, novel topical agents that interfere with bacterial colonization, antiadhesin molecules and agents that block the gene expression involved in the biofilm formation, are all needed to reduce the high catheter-related infection risk among HIV+ patients.

[Catheter-related infection in intensive care. Physiopathology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention]

PURPOSE

To review the mechanisms, diagnosis, treatment and prophylaxis of catheter-related sepsis in intensive care unit patients.

DATA SOURCES

A Medline research of the English- or French-language reports published between 1966 and 2000 and a manual research of references of relevant papers.

STUDY SELECTION

Experimental, clinical and basic research studies related to catheter-related sepsis.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data in selected articles were reviewed, and relevant clinical information was extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Infection remains the major complication related to catheter insertion. No bacteriological exam or systematic catheter change is required in the absence of infection suspicion. In the intensive care unit, and without septic shock, the surveillance of skin cultures at the catheter insertion site or the time to positivity of hub-blood versus peripheral-blood culture determination may reduce the number of unnecessary removed catheters. Catheter change over a guidewire is not recommended because of the risk of dissemination of infection. When the catheter is removed, a quantitative culture is warranted. The treatment of catheter-related sepsis is based on catheter removal. The use of antibiotics is limited to some organisms or when the infection is complicated. The persistence of fever and positive blood cultures 72 h after catheter removal require to look for dissemination of infection or septic thrombophlebitis, especially if S. aureus or Candida are incriminated. The treatment of infection without catheter removal is not recommended in the intensive care unit because of a high risk of treatment failure. Compliance with catheter care guidelines and continuing quality improvement programs are the two major procedures in reducing catheter infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Improved understanding of the pathophysiology of catheter-related sepsis has led to improved prevention. Compliance with catheter care guidelines and continuing quality improvement programs are majors procedures to reduce the risk of catheter infection.

Reducing central venous catheter infections

This article reviews the current literature in relation to the management of central venous catheters and the prevention of catheter related infection. Sources and factors influencing catheter related infection are reviewed. In some areas of catheter management, there are clear recommendations such as the choice of skin preparation and catheter site. Other areas don't have clear guidelines; this results in varying practices and the need for further research. The latest research has been in the areas of impregnated catheters with studies showing some benefits. Recent research has also analysed the effect of the method of fluid and line changes as well as their frequency in relation to catheter related infections. A summary is given outlining interventions which have evidence supporting their practice in the reduction of catheter related infections along with interventions which may be effective in reducing catheter related infection and the need for further research.

Bacteremia associated with central venous catheter infection is not an independent predictor of outcomes

BACKGROUND

Infection is the leading complication of central venous catheters. In the setting of suspected line infection, the CDC recognizes only catheter-related bloodstream infection but not catheter infection without bacteremia, which is designated "colonization." To evaluate the hypothesis that catheter-related bloodstream infection has worse outcomes than catheter infection without bacteremia, we compared demographics, clinical data, and outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Analysis of catheter infections was performed on data collected prospectively for all episodes of infection occurring from December 1996 to September 1999 on the surgical services at a university hospital. Catheter tips were cultured only when infection was suspected. Catheter infection without bacteremia was defined as systemic evidence of infection, the presence of at least 15 colony-forming units on the catheter tip by a semiquantitative technique, and absence of bloodstream infection with the same organism as the catheter. Catheter-related bloodstream infection required the presence of bacteremia with the same organism as the catheter tip.

RESULTS

The 59 patients with catheter-related bloodstream infection had more coexistent infections than the 91 patients with catheter infection without bacteremia (2.9+/-0.1 versus 1.7+/-0.1; p=0.0001), most commonly pneumonia (37.3% versus 16.5%, p = 0.004) and urinary tract infections (28.8% versus 8.8%, p = 0.001). Catheter-related bloodstream infection was associated with an increased proportion of gram-negative organisms compared with catheter infections without bacteremia (29.5% versus 16.9%, p = 0.04) and a trend toward fewer gram-positive organisms (61.5% versus 73.7%, p = 0.07). There were no differences in APACHE II score, WBC, length of hospital stay, time from admission to fever, time from fever to treatment, normalization of WBC, days of antibiotics, defervescence, gender, presence of comorbidities, occurrence of colonization while in an ICU, or mortality rate (18.6% with bacteremia, 24.2% without; p = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of bloodstream infection in addition to catheter infection does not appear to alter outcomes. The definition of catheter infection perhaps should be extended to include catheter infections without bloodstream infection in the presence of systemic illness without another source.

[The risk factors associated with colonization and bacteremia in non-tunnelled central venous catheters]

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for colonization and bacteremia among patients with non-tunnelled central venous catheters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective study was conducted of a cohort of patients carrying non-tunnelled central venous catheters. Different parameters were obtained and the degree of its association with colonization of the distal portion of the catheter or with bacteremia associated with colonization was estimated. The CDC (centers for Disease Control) diagnostic criteria of colonization and catheter-related bacteremia were used.

RESULTS

A total of 118 catheters were eventually analyzed, corresponding to 114 patients, with a catheterization mean time of 14 +/- 8 days (mean +/- SD); out of these 114 patients, 51 were colonized and in 22 the presence of associated bacteremia was confirmed. The parameters associated with a higher risk for catheter colonization included length of colonization, femoral location, number of lumina and a vital prognosis lower than one month. All these factors, with the exception of the increase in the number of lumina, showed an independent association with colonization on the multivariate analysis [catheterization length (in weeks): OR 1.46; 95% CI: 1.0-2.11; femoral location: OR 3.73; 95% CI: 1.16-11.9; vital prognosis lower than one month: OR 12.7; 95% CI: 1.4-112.7]. As for risk for catheter-related bacteremia, the univariate analysis showed an association with catheterization length and a vital prognosis lower than one month; the latter was the only factor that maintained an independent association in the multivariate analysis (OR 5.75; 95% CI: 1.17-28.27).

CONCLUSION

The present study documents the relevance of prolonged catheterization as a consistent risk for colonization of non-tunnelled central venous catheters. This risk increases independently in canalization at femoral site and particularly among severely ill patients. The presence of these factors allows the identification of a high risk population for the development of catheter related bacteremia.

Dialysis and central venous catheter infections in critically ill patients: results of a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of dialysis catheter (DC)-related infections in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, and to compare the frequency of DC and central venous catheter (CVC) infections in an ICU setting.

DESIGN

Prospective, descriptive survey.

SETTING

An adult, 10-bed medical/surgical ICU at a university hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 151 DCs and 230 CVCs placed in 170 patients were evaluated.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Catheter colonization was defined by a quantitative catheter tip culture yielding > or =10(3) colony-forming units/mL, catheter-related bacteremia was defined as catheter colonization and blood culture positive for the same organism, and site infection was defined as the presence of pus at the insertion site. The mean duration of catheterization was 6.8+/-6 days for DCs and 5.9+/-4.6 for CVCs (p = .52). There was no difference between DCs and CVCs in catheter colonization and catheter-related bacteremia incidence rates per 1000 days of catheter use (24.2 vs. 19.8 [p = .46] and 0.96 vs. 1.5 [p = .60], respectively). Site infection was observed in one patient (CVC placement). For DCs and CVCs the duration of catheterization was associated with catheter infection (p = .0007 and p = .04, respectively), but when the catheters were examined over 5-day intervals, the incidence of catheter infections did not increase with duration of catheter use (p = .23 and p = .10, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

DC-related infections are associated with DC longevity. As shown by the 5-day-interval analysis, the incidence of DC-related infections did not increase with DC duration, suggesting that the risk for DC-related infections remained unchanged with time. The characteristics of DC-related infections in ICU patients were comparable to those previously reported for CVC-related infections.

Prospective evaluation of risk factors for bloodstream infection in patients receiving home infusion therapy

BACKGROUND

Intravenous therapy in the outpatient and home settings is commonplace for many diseases and nutritional disorders. Few data are available on the rate of and risk factors for bloodstream infection among patients receiving such therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine rates of and risk factors for bloodstream infection among patients receiving home infusion therapy.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational cohort study.

SETTING

Cleveland, Ohio, and Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

PATIENTS

Patients receiving home infusion therapy through a central or midline catheter.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection.

RESULTS

Among 827 patients (988 catheters), the most common diagnoses were infections other than HIV (67%), cancer (24%), nutritional and digestive disease (17%), heart disease (14%), receipt of bone marrow or solid organ transplants (11%), and HIV infection (7%). Sixty-nine bloodstream infections occurred during 69,532 catheter-days (0.99 infections per 1000 days). In a Cox regression model with time-dependent covariates, independent risk factors for bloodstream infection were recent receipt of a bone marrow transplant (hazard ratio, 5.8 [95% CI, 3.0 to 11.3]), receipt of total parenteral nutrition (hazard ratio, 4.1 [CI, 2.3 to 7.2]), receipt of therapy outside the home (for example, in an outpatient clinic or physician's office) (hazard ratio, 3.6 [CI, 2.2 to 5.9]), use of a multilumen catheter (hazard ratio, 2.8 [CI, 1.7 to 4.7]), and previous bloodstream infection (hazard ratio, 2.5 [CI, 1.5 to 4.2]). Rates of bloodstream infection per 1000 catheter-days varied from 0.16 for patients with none of these 5 risk factors to 6.77 for patients with 3 or more risk factors. Centrally inserted venous catheters were associated with a higher risk than implanted ports were, but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Bloodstream infections seem to be infrequent among outpatients receiving infusions through central and midline catheters. However, the rate of infection increases with bone marrow transplantation, parenteral nutrition, infusion therapy in a hospital clinic or physician's office, and use of multilumen catheters. Compared with implanted ports or peripherally inserted catheters, centrally inserted venous catheters may confer greater risk for bloodstream infection.