Anti-infective-treated central venous catheters for total parenteral nutrition or chemotherapy: a systematic review

Analyzing the antiseptic capacity of silver-functionalized poly(ethylene glycol)–heparin hydrogels after human whole blood exposure

Advanced blood contacting biomaterials are designed to combine antiseptic and anticoagulant functionalities.

Annual revision rates of partial versus total knee arthroplasty: A comparative meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Utilization of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) as alternatives to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA) has increased. However, no single resource consolidates survivorship data between TKA and partial resurfacing options for each variant of unicompartmental OA. This meta-analysis compared survivorship between TKA and medial UKA (MUKA), lateral UKA (LUKA) and PFA using annual revision rate as a standardized metric.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for studies quantifying TKA, MUKA, LUKA and/or PFA implant survivorship. Studies were classified by evidence level and assessed for bias using the MINORS and PEDro instruments. Annual revision rates were calculated for each arthroplasty procedure as percentages/observed component-year, based on a Poisson-normal model with random effects using the R-statistical software package.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-four studies (113 cohort and 11 registry-based studies) met inclusion/exclusion criteria, providing data for 374,934 arthroplasties and 14,991 revisions. The overall evidence level was low, with 96.7% of studies classified as level III-IV. Annual revision rates were lowest for TKA (0.49%, CI 0.41 to 0.58), followed by MUKA (1.07%, CI 0.87 to 1.31), LUKA (1.13%, CI 0.69 to 1.83) and PFA (1.75%, CI 1.19 to 2.57). No difference was detected between revision rates for MUKA and LUKA (p=0.222).

CONCLUSIONS

Revisions of MUKA, LUKA and PFA occur at an annual rate of 2.18, 2.31 and 3.57-fold that of TKA, respectively. These estimates may be used to inform clinical decision-making, guide patient expectations and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of total versus partial knee replacement in the setting of unicompartmental OA.

CATheter Infections in CHildren (CATCH): a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation comparing impregnated and standard central venous catheters in children

BACKGROUND

Impregnated central venous catheters (CVCs) are recommended for adults to reduce bloodstream infection (BSI) but not for children.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of impregnated compared with standard CVCs for reducing BSI in children admitted for intensive care.

DESIGN

Multicentre randomised controlled trial, cost-effectiveness analysis from a NHS perspective and a generalisability analysis and cost impact analysis.

SETTING

14 English paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Children aged < 16 years admitted to a PICU and expected to require a CVC for ≥ 3 days.

INTERVENTIONS

Heparin-bonded, antibiotic-impregnated (rifampicin and minocycline) or standard polyurethane CVCs, allocated randomly (1 : 1 : 1). The intervention was blinded to all but inserting clinicians.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Time to first BSI sampled between 48 hours after randomisation and 48 hours after CVC removal. The following data were used in the trial: trial case report forms; hospital administrative data for 6 months pre and post randomisation; and national-linked PICU audit and laboratory data.

RESULTS

In total, 1859 children were randomised, of whom 501 were randomised prospectively and 1358 were randomised as an emergency; of these, 984 subsequently provided deferred consent for follow-up. Clinical effectiveness - BSIs occurred in 3.59% (18/502) of children randomised to standard CVCs, 1.44% (7/486) of children randomised to antibiotic CVCs and 3.42% (17/497) of children randomised to heparin CVCs. Primary analyses comparing impregnated (antibiotic and heparin CVCs) with standard CVCs showed no effect of impregnated CVCs [hazard ratio (HR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 1.34]. Secondary analyses showed that antibiotic CVCs were superior to standard CVCs (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.96) but heparin CVCs were not (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.03). Time to thrombosis, mortality by 30 days and minocycline/rifampicin resistance did not differ by CVC. Cost-effectiveness - heparin CVCs were not clinically effective and therefore were not cost-effective. The incremental cost of antibiotic CVCs compared with standard CVCs over a 6-month time horizon was £1160 (95% CI -£4743 to £6962), with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £54,057 per BSI avoided. There was considerable uncertainty in costs: antibiotic CVCs had a probability of 0.35 of being dominant. Based on index hospital stay costs only, antibiotic CVCs were associated with a saving of £97,543 per BSI averted. The estimated value of health-care resources associated with each BSI was £10,975 (95% CI -£2801 to £24,751). Generalisability and cost-impact - the baseline risk of BSI in 2012 for PICUs in England was 4.58 (95% CI 4.42 to 4.74) per 1000 bed-days. An estimated 232 BSIs could have been averted in 2012 using antibiotic CVCs. The additional cost of purchasing antibiotic CVCs for all children who require them (£36 per CVC) would be less than the value of resources associated with managing BSIs in PICUs with standard BSI rates of > 1.2 per 1000 CVC-days.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary outcome did not differ between impregnated and standard CVCs. However, antibiotic-impregnated CVCs significantly reduced the risk of BSI compared with standard and heparin CVCs. Adoption of antibiotic-impregnated CVCs could be beneficial even for PICUs with low BSI rates, although uncertainty remains whether or not they represent value for money to the NHS. Limitations - inserting clinicians were not blinded to allocation and a lower than expected event rate meant that there was limited power for head-to-head comparisons of each type of impregnation. Future work - adoption of impregnated CVCs in PICUs should be considered and could be monitored through linkage of electronic health-care data and clinical data on CVC use with laboratory surveillance data on BSI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01029717.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A randomized trial on chlorhexidine dressings for the prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infections in neutropenic patients

BACKGROUND

Central venous catheter (CVC)-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) are a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Chlorhexidine containing catheter securement dressings may prevent CRBSI.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multicenter randomized, controlled trial was conducted at 10 German hematology departments. We compared chlorhexidine-containing dressings with non-chlorhexidine control dressings in neutropenic patients. The primary end point was the incidence of definite CRBSI within the first 14 days (dCRBSI14) of CVC placement. Secondary end points included combined incidence of definite or probable CRBSI within 14 days (dpCRBSI14), overall (dpCRBSI), incidence of unscheduled dressing changes and adverse events.

RESULTS

From February 2012 to September 2014, 613 assessable patients were included in the study. The incidence of dCRBSI14 was 2.6% (8/307) in the chlorhexidine and 3.9% (12/306) in the control group (P = 0.375). Both dpCRBSI14 and dpCRBSI were significantly less frequent in the study group with dpCRBSI14 in 6.5% (20/307) of the chlorhexidine group when compared with 11% (34/306) in the control group (P = 0.047), and dpCRBSI in 10.4% (32/307) versus 17% (52/306), respectively (P = 0.019). The frequency of dressing intolerance with cutaneous and soft tissue abnormalities at the contact area was similar in both groups (12.4% and 11.8%; P = 0.901).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the trial failed its primary end point, the application of chlorhexidine containing catheter securement dressings reduces the incidence of definite or probable CRBSI in neutropenic patients.

CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER

NCT01544686 (Clinicaltrials.gov).

Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter-related infections in adults

BACKGROUND

The central venous catheter (CVC) is essential in managing acutely ill patients in hospitals. Bloodstream infection is a major complication in patients with a CVC. Several infection control measures have been developed to reduce bloodstream infections, one of which is impregnation of CVCs with various forms of antimicrobials (either with an antiseptic or with antibiotics). This review was originally published in June 2013 and updated in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

Our main objective was to assess the effectiveness of antimicrobial impregnation, coating or bonding on CVCs in reducing clinically-diagnosed sepsis, catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI), all-cause mortality, catheter colonization and other catheter-related infections in adult participants who required central venous catheterization, along with their safety and cost effectiveness where data were available. We undertook the following comparisons: 1) catheters with antimicrobial modifications in the form of antimicrobial impregnation, coating or bonding, against catheters without antimicrobial modifications and 2) catheters with one type of antimicrobial impregnation against catheters with another type of antimicrobial impregnation. We planned to analyse the comparison of catheters with any type of antimicrobial impregnation against catheters with other antimicrobial modifications, e.g. antiseptic dressings, hubs, tunnelling, needleless connectors or antiseptic lock solutions, but did not find any relevant studies. Additionally, we planned to conduct subgroup analyses based on the length of catheter use, settings or levels of care (e.g. intensive care unit, standard ward and oncology unit), baseline risks, definition of sepsis, presence or absence of co-interventions and cost-effectiveness in different currencies.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Anaesthesia, Critical and Emergency Care Review Group (ACE). In the updated review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 3), MEDLINE (OVID SP; 1950 to March 2015), EMBASE (1980 to March 2015), CINAHL (1982 to March 2015), and other Internet resources using a combination of keywords and MeSH headings. The original search was run in March 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed any type of impregnated catheter against either non-impregnated catheters or catheters with another type of impregnation in adult patients cared for in the hospital setting who required CVCs. We planned to include quasi-RCT and cluster-RCTs, but we identified none. We excluded cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently assessed the relevance and risk of bias of the retrieved records. We expressed our results using risk ratio (RR), absolute risk reduction (ARR) and number need to treat to benefit (NNTB) for categorical data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, where appropriate, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included one new study (338 participants/catheters) in this update, which brought the total included to 57 studies with 16,784 catheters and 11 types of impregnations. The total number of participants enrolled was unclear, as some studies did not provide this information. Most studies enrolled participants from the age of 18, including patients in intensive care units (ICU), oncology units and patients receiving long-term total parenteral nutrition. There were low or unclear risks of bias in the included studies, except for blinding, which was impossible in most studies due to the catheters that were being assessed having different appearances. Overall, catheter impregnation significantly reduced catheter-related blood stream infection (CRBSI), with an ARR of 2% (95% CI 3% to 1%), RR of 0.62 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.74) and NNTB of 50 (high-quality evidence). Catheter impregnation also reduced catheter colonization, with an ARR of 9% (95% CI 12% to 7%), RR of 0.67 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.76) and NNTB of 11 (moderate-quality evidence, downgraded due to substantial heterogeneity). However, catheter impregnation made no significant difference to the rates of clinically diagnosed sepsis (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13; moderate-quality evidence, downgraded due to a suspicion of publication bias), all-cause mortality (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07; high-quality evidence) and catheter-related local infections (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.07; 2688 catheters, moderate quality evidence, downgraded due to wide 95% CI).In our subgroup analyses, we found that the magnitudes of benefits for impregnated CVCs varied between studies that enrolled different types of participants. For the outcome of catheter colonization, catheter impregnation conferred significant benefit in studies conducted in ICUs (RR 0.70;95% CI 0.61 to 0.80) but not in studies conducted in haematological and oncological units (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.11) or studies that assessed predominantly patients who required CVCs for long-term total parenteral nutrition (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.34). However, there was no such variation for the outcome of CRBSI. The magnitude of the effects was also not affected by the participants' baseline risks.There were no significant differences between the impregnated and non-impregnated groups in the rates of adverse effects, including thrombosis/thrombophlebitis, bleeding, erythema and/or tenderness at the insertion site.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review confirms the effectiveness of antimicrobial CVCs in reducing rates of CRBSI and catheter colonization. However, the magnitude of benefits regarding catheter colonization varied according to setting, with significant benefits only in studies conducted in ICUs. A comparatively smaller body of evidence suggests that antimicrobial CVCs do not appear to reduce clinically diagnosed sepsis or mortality significantly. Our findings call for caution in routinely recommending the use of antimicrobial-impregnated CVCs across all settings. Further randomized controlled trials assessing antimicrobial CVCs should include important clinical outcomes like the overall rates of sepsis and mortality.

Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter-related infections in adults

BACKGROUND

The central venous catheter (CVC) is a commonly used device in managing acutely ill patients in the hospital. Bloodstream infections are major complications in patients who require a CVC. Several infection control measures have been developed to reduce bloodstream infections, one of which is CVC impregnated with various forms of antimicrobials (either with an antiseptic or with antibiotics).

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effects of antimicrobial CVCs in reducing clinically diagnosed sepsis, established catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) and mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group (CARG). We searched MEDLINE (OVID SP) (1950 to March 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2012), EMBASE (1980 to March 2012), CINAHL (1982 to March 2012) and other Internet resources using a combination of keywords and MeSH headings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that assessed any type of impregnated catheter against either non-impregnated catheters or catheters with another impregnation. We excluded cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data using the standard methods of the CARG. Two authors independently assessed the relevance and risk of bias of the retrieved records. We expressed our results using risk ratio (RR), absolute risk reduction (ARR) and number need to treat to benefit (NNTB) for categorical data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data where appropriate with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 56 studies with 16,512 catheters and 11 types of antimicrobial impregnations. The total number of participants enrolled was unclear as some studies did not provide this information. There were low or unclear risks of bias in the included studies, except for blinding, which was impossible in most studies due to different appearances between the catheters assessed. Overall, catheter impregnation significantly reduced CRBSI, with an ARR of 2% (95% CI 3% to 1%), RR of 0.61 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.73) and NNTB of 50. Catheter impregnation also reduced catheter colonization, with an ARR of 10% (95% CI 13% to 7%), RR of 0.66 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.75) and NNTB of 10. However, catheter impregnation made no significant difference to the rates of clinically diagnosed sepsis (RR 1.0 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.13)) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.88 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.05)).In our subgroup analyses, we found that the magnitudes of benefits for impregnated CVCs varied in studies that enrolled different types of participants. For the outcome of catheter colonization, catheter impregnation conferred significant benefit in studies conducted in intensive care units (ICUs) (RR 0.68 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.78)) but not in studies conducted in haematological and oncological units (RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.11)) or studies that assessed predominantly patients who required CVCs for long-term total parenteral nutrition (TPN)(RR 0.99 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.34)). However, there was no such variation for the outcome of CRBSI. The magnitude of the effects was also not affected by the participants' baseline risks.There were no significant differences between the impregnated and non-impregnated groups in the rates of adverse effects, including thrombosis/thrombophlebitis, bleeding, erythema and/or tenderness at the insertion site.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review confirms the effectiveness of antimicrobial CVCs in improving such outcomes as CRBSI and catheter colonization. However, the magnitude of benefits in catheter colonization varied according to the setting, with significant benefits only in studies conducted in ICUs. Limited evidence suggests that antimicrobial CVCs do not appear to significantly reduce clinically diagnosed sepsis or mortality. Our findings call for caution in routinely recommending the use of antimicrobial-impregnated CVCs across all settings. Further randomized controlled trials assessing antimicrobial CVCs should include important clinical outcomes like the overall rates of sepsis and mortality.

Central venous catheter care for the patient with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

To develop an evidence-based guideline on central venous catheter (CVC) care for patients with cancer that addresses catheter type, insertion site, and placement as well as prophylaxis and management of both catheter-related infection and thrombosis.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library (1980 to July 2012) identified relevant articles published in English.

RESULTS

The overall quality of the randomized controlled trial evidence was rated as good. There is consistency among meta-analyses and guidelines compiled by other groups as well.

RECOMMENDATIONS

There is insufficient evidence to recommend one CVC type or insertion site; femoral catheterization should be avoided. CVC should be placed by well-trained providers, and the use of a CVC clinical care bundle is recommended. The use of antimicrobial/antiseptic-impregnated and/or heparin-impregnated CVCs is recommended to decrease the risk of catheter-related infections for short-term CVCs, particularly in high-risk groups; more research is needed. The prophylactic use of systemic antibiotics is not recommended before insertion. Data are not sufficient to recommend for or against routine use of antibiotic flush/lock therapy; more research is needed. Before starting antibiotic therapy, cultures should be obtained. Some life-threatening infections require immediate catheter removal, but most can be treated with antimicrobial therapy while the CVC remains in place. Routine flushing with saline is recommended. Prophylactic use of warfarin or low-molecular weight heparin is not recommended, although a tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) is recommended to restore patency to occluded catheters. CVC removal is recommended when the catheter is no longer needed or if there is a radiologically confirmed thrombosis that worsens despite anticoagulation therapy.

Central venous catheter-associated bloodstream infections in a pediatric intensive care unit: effect of the location of catheter insertion

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rate of central venous catheter-associated bloodstream infections between pediatric intensive care unit admissions where central venous catheters were inserted within the same hospital (internal central venous catheters) and those where central venous catheters were inserted before transfer from other hospitals (external central venous catheters).

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

SETTING

A tertiary care pediatric intensive care unit in London, UK.

PATIENTS

Consecutive pediatric intensive care unit admissions between May 2007 and March 2009.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Catheter-associated bloodstream infections were identified using a widely accepted surveillance definition. The rate and time to occurrence of catheter-associated bloodstream infection were compared between internal and external nontunneled central venous catheters. A multilevel Cox-regression model was used to study the association between location of central venous catheter insertion and time to catheter-associated bloodstream infection. In total, 382 central venous catheters were studied (245 internal; 137 external) accounting for a total of 1,737 central venous catheter days. There was a higher catheter-associated bloodstream infection incidence density among external central venous catheters (23.1 [95% confidence interval 11.0-35.2] vs. 9.7 [95% confidence interval 3.9-15.5] per 1,000 catheter-days). Multivariable analyses demonstrated higher infection risk with external central venous catheters (hazard ratio 2.65 [95% confidence interval 1.18-5.96]) despite adjustment for confounding variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of catheter-associated bloodstream infections in the pediatric intensive care unit is significantly affected by external insertion of the central venous catheter. Future interventions to reduce nosocomial infections on pediatric intensive care units will need to be specifically targeted at this high-risk patient group.

A review of epidural catheter-related infections

Spinal drug delivery is a generally safe and effective therapy for the treatment of both acute and chronic pain. However, it can be occasionally associated with significant complications, including neurologic injury, as a result of bleeding and infection in a confined space. This article focuses on risk factors for developing epidural catheter-related infections as well as strategies to minimize risks. Additionally, the diagnosis and management of epidural catheter-related infections, both superficial and deep, are discussed.

Random effects meta-analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data

We consider random effects meta-analysis where the outcome variable is the occurrence of some event of interest. The data structures handled are where one has one or more groups in each study, and in each group either the number of subjects with and without the event, or the number of events and the total duration of follow-up is available. Traditionally, the meta-analysis follows the summary measures approach based on the estimates of the outcome measure(s) and the corresponding standard error(s). This approach assumes an approximate normal within-study likelihood and treats the standard errors as known. This approach has several potential disadvantages, such as not accounting for the standard errors being estimated, not accounting for correlation between the estimate and the standard error, the use of an (arbitrary) continuity correction in case of zero events, and the normal approximation being bad in studies with few events. We show that these problems can be overcome in most cases occurring in practice by replacing the approximate normal within-study likelihood by the appropriate exact likelihood. This leads to a generalized linear mixed model that can be fitted in standard statistical software. For instance, in the case of odds ratio meta-analysis, one can use the non-central hypergeometric distribution likelihood leading to mixed-effects conditional logistic regression. For incidence rate ratio meta-analysis, it leads to random effects logistic regression with an offset variable. We also present bivariate and multivariate extensions. We present a number of examples, especially with rare events, among which an example of network meta-analysis.

Central line-associated bloodstream infections: prevention and management

Approximately 80,000 central venous line-associated bloodstream infections (CLA-BSI) occur in the United States each year. CLA-BSI is most commonly caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci, Staphylococcus aureus, Candida spp, and aerobic gram-negative bacilli. These organisms commonly gain entrance in into the bloodstream via the catheter-skin interface (insertion site) or via the catheter hub. Use of strict aseptic technique for insertion is the key method for the prevention of CLA-BSI. Various methods can be used to reduce unacceptably high rates of CLA-BSI, including use of an antiseptic- or antibiotic-impregnated catheter, daily chlorhexidine baths/washes, and placement of a chlorhexidine-impregnated sponge over the insertion site.

Effectiveness of different central venous catheters for catheter-related infections: a network meta-analysis

We aimed to compare the effectiveness of various catheters for prevention of catheter-related infection and to evaluate whether specific catheters are superior to others for reducing catheter-related infections. We identified randomised, controlled trials that compared different types of central venous catheter (CVC), evaluating catheter-related infections in a systematic search of articles published from January 1996 to November 2009 via Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Network meta-analysis with a mixed treatment comparison method using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation was used to combine direct within-trial, between-treatment comparisons with indirect trial evidence. Forty-eight clinical trials (12 828 CVCs) investigating 10 intervention catheters contributed to the analyses. For prevention of CVC colonisation, adjusted silver iontophoretic catheters (odds ratio: 0.58; 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.95), chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine catheters (0.49; 0.36-0.64), chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine blue plus catheters (0.37; 0.17-0.69), minocycline-rifampicin catheters (0.28; 0.17-0.43) and miconazole-rifampicin catheters (0.11; 0.02-0.33) were associated with a significantly lower rate of catheter colonisation compared with standard catheters. For prevention of CRBSI, adjusted heparin-bonded catheters (0.20; 0.06-0.44) and minocycline-rifampicin catheters (0.18; 0.08-0.34) were associated with a significantly lower rate of CRBSI with standard catheters. Rifampicin-based impregnated catheters seem to be better for prevention of catheter-related infection compared with the other catheters.

[Treatment of serious burns]

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with large burns is challenging.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

The article is based on clinical experience, and a non-systematic review in PubMed.

RESULTS

In patients with burns covering more than 10 - 15 % of the total body surface area, fluid resuscitation should be initiated early. Fluid induces edema, and facial burns may necessitate early orotracheal intubation to secure the airways. Reduced ventilation and-/or peripheral circulation due to deep burns should be managed by early escharotomy (and, more seldom, fasciotomy) at the primary hospital. Respiratory distress is most often due to vigorous fluid resuscitation, secretions, pneumonia and-/or sepsis. Fiber bronchoscopy may reveal inhalation injury and enables removal of secreted material from the airways. In the acute initial phase, hypotension is usually caused by hypovolemia. Subsequently a massive inflammatory response (SIRS) causes vasodilatation, hypotension and increased cardiac output. Wound and airway infections are common. SIRS may cause CRP levels above 100 and a body temperature of 38 - 39 degrees C, which makes it difficult to find the right time to start antibiotic treatment. Nevertheless, prophylactic use of antibiotics is not encouraged. Definitive surgery, excision and transplantation, should be performed early, preferably within the first week.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with large burns should be treated according to general principles for intensive medical care, preferably in units with special experience in treatment of burns.

[Bacterial infections in critically ill patients: review of studies published between 2006 and 2008]

A systematic revision of medical publications between 2006 and 2008 regarding bacterial infections that affect the critical patients was performed. Four subjects were selected: Community-acquired pneumonia, ventilator-associated pneumonia, catheter-related bloodstream infection and new antimicrobial treatments. When dealing with community-acquired pneumonia and due to the absence of completely reliable standards, it is necessary to follow the locally adapted guidelines of clinical practice, to identify patients related to the health-care system and admit patients to the ICU in accordance with the criteria. Regarding the etiological diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia, any microbiological information available must be used. Due to the risk of multidrug bacteria, combined empiric therapy should be initiated immediately and then mono-therapy adjusted to the antibiogram should be established. Already established measures for mechanical ventilation associated pneumonia and catheter-related bacteriemias, which have been effective, should be implemented. The empirical treatment of catheter-related bacteremia must be directed towards the most probable pathogens according to the puncture site. The most recently sold antibiotics are basically directed towards multidrug gram positive resistant bacteria. However, for the treatment of gram negative resistant bacilli, the use of the new antimicrobials must be combined with a new evaluation of the antibiotics that have been used for years and the possibility of choosing different administration forms.