Chlorhexidine 2% and choice of transparent dressing increase skin reactions at central venous catheter insertion sites

A GAVeCeLT consensus on the indication, insertion, and management of central venous access devices in the critically ill

Central venous access devices are essential for the management of critically ill patients, but they are potentially associated with many complications, which may occur during or after insertion. Many evidence-based documents-consensus and guidelines-suggest practical recommendations for reducing catheter-related complications, but they have some limitations. Some documents are not focused on critically ill patients; other documents address only some special strategies, such as the use of ultrasound; other documents are biased by obsolete concepts, inappropriate terminology, and lack of considerations for new technologies and new methods. Thus, the Italian Group of Venous Access Devices (GAVeCeLT) has decided to offer an updated compendium of the main strategies-old and new-that should be adopted for minimizing catheter-related complications in the adult critically ill patient. The project has been planned as a consensus, rather than a guideline, since many issues in this field are relatively recent, and few high-quality randomized clinical studies are currently available, particularly in the area of indications and choice of the device. Panelists were chosen between the Italian vascular access experts who had published papers on peer-reviewed journals about this topic in the last few years. The consensus process was carried out according to the RAND/University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methodology, a modification of the Delphi method, that is, a structured process for collecting knowledge from groups of experts through a series of questionnaires. The final document has been structured as statements which answer to four major sets of questions regarding central venous access in the critically ill: (1) before insertion (seven questions), (2) during insertion (eight questions), (3) after insertion (three questions), and (4) at removal (three questions).

Managing central venous catheter dressings: a short gut syndrome case study

Central venous catheter care may be complicated by complex patient considerations. Central-line associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) risk factors are multifaceted. Case report to highlight patient complexity that challenges bundled practices.

Expert consensus-based clinical practice guidelines management of intravascular catheters in the intensive care unit

The French Society of Intensive Care Medicine (SRLF), jointly with the French-Speaking Group of Paediatric Emergency Rooms and Intensive Care Units (GFRUP) and the French-Speaking Association of Paediatric Surgical Intensivists (ADARPEF), worked out guidelines for the management of central venous catheters (CVC), arterial catheters and dialysis catheters in intensive care unit. For adult patients: Using GRADE methodology, 36 recommendations for an improved catheter management were produced by the 22 experts. Recommendations regarding catheter-related infections’ prevention included the preferential use of subclavian central vein (GRADE 1), a one-step skin disinfection(GRADE 1) using 2% chlorhexidine (CHG)-alcohol (GRADE 1), and the implementation of a quality of care improvement program. Antiseptic- or antibiotic-impregnated CVC should likely not be used (GRADE 2, for children and adults). Catheter dressings should likely not be changed before the 7th day, except when the dressing gets detached, soiled or impregnated with blood (GRADE 2− adults). CHG dressings should likely be used (GRADE 2+). For adults and children, ultrasound guidance should be used to reduce mechanical complications in case of internal jugular access (GRADE 1), subclavian access (Grade 2) and femoral venous, arterial radial and femoral access (Expert opinion). For children, an ultrasound-guided supraclavicular approach of the brachiocephalic vein was recommended to reduce the number of attempts for cannulation and mechanical complications. Based on scarce publications on diagnostic and therapeutic strategies and on their experience (expert opinion), the panel proposed definitions, and therapeutic strategies.

In vitro antimicrobial effects of chlorhexidine diacetate versus chlorhexidine free base dressings

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the in vitro antimicrobial performance of a chlorhexidine diacetate dressing and a chlorhexidine free base dressing to determine if the free base form of chlorhexidine has the potential to be an effective alternative to the chlorhexidine salts used in conventional, chlorhexidine-based antimicrobial dressings.

METHOD

Dressing samples were inoculated with clinically relevant pathogenic microorganisms including Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, yeasts and fungus, and subsequently evaluated for in vitro log₁₀ reduction at 1-, 3-, and 7-day time points. Chlorhexidine mole content was also calculated as a function of dressing surface area for both sample types to allow for formulation-independent comparison between the dressings.

RESULTS

The chlorhexidine free base dressing demonstrated >0.5 log₁₀ superior mean antimicrobial efficacy at 67% of the experimental time points and equivalent mean antimicrobial efficacy (≤0.5 log₁₀ different) at the remaining time points when compared with the chlorhexidine diacetate dressing. The chlorhexidine free base dressing was also found to contain 36% less chlorhexidine mole content than the chlorhexidine diacetate dressing.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that a dressing formulated with chlorhexidine free base can deliver in vitro antimicrobial performance at both a magnitude and rate that meets or exceeds that of a chlorhexidine diacetate-based dressing, while also allowing for a reduction in total chlorhexidine content per dressing. These findings could be of particular interest to researchers developing new antimicrobial technologies as well as to infection preventionists when evaluating antimicrobial products for use on clinical patients at elevated risk of infection.

Dressings for the central venous catheter to prevent infection in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To identify the most effective dressing for covering long-term central venous catheter exit site to prevent catheter-related infections and skin irritation in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

METHODS

Systematic Review. The search was performed in the following electronic databases: CINAHL, Cochrane Library CENTRAL, EMBASE, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Google Scholar was used for the gray literature search.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included which tested different arrangements of dressings: sterilized gauze and adhesive tape with a transparent polyurethane film (n = 2), transparent polyurethane film with a different replacement interval frequency (n = 2), transparent polyurethane film with and without chlorhexidine released continuously by the dressing at the site of intravascular catheter insertion (n = 2), and dressings vs. no dressings (n = 1). The meta-analysis for catheter-related infection prevention showed no difference between type of dressing (RR 1.76, [95% CI 0.82; 3.75], I₂ 0%) and for the replacement frequency at different intervals (RR 1.04, [95% CI 0.67; 1.61], I₂ 0%). The meta-analysis for skin irritation evaluated the transparent polyurethane film replacement frequency and indicated that a longer dressing replacement interval (10 to 15 days) reduces the risk of developing this outcome (RR 0.71, 0.52; 0.96, 95% CI, I₂ 24%).

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding the type of the dressing, there is no evidence indicating the best dressing. Although there is no evidence available for the ideal replacement frequency, the risk to develop skin irritation is reduced in longer dressing replacements intervals.

Comparative efficacy of 13 antimicrobial dressings and different securement devices in reducing catheter-related bloodstream infections: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of our study is to carry out a Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of different antimicrobial dressings for prevention of catheter-related blood infections (CRBSI) and rank these antimicrobial dressings for practical consideration.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, earlier relevant meta-analysis and reference lists of included studies for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared dressings for prevention of CRBSI. Two authors independently extracted data from each included RCT according to a predesigned Excel spreadsheet and assessed the methodological quality of included RCTs using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data was analyzed using the WinBUGS (V.1.4.3) and the Stata (V.15.0).

RESULTS

Finally, 35 RCTs involving 8494 patients and evaluating 13 dressings were included. Network meta-analysis showed that transparent dressing may be the best way to prevent CRBSI. Suture and bordered polyurethane dressing might have the lowest risk of CRBSI rate per 1000 catheter-days, and sutureless securement device might lead to the lowest incidence of catheter failure.

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis indicated that transparent dressings may be selected for the prevention of CRBSI in patients with central venous catheters, which is of importance in future research. Although evidence is scant, more attention should be paid to head-to-head comparisons of the most commonly used dressings in this field.