Antiseptic barrier caps in central line-associated bloodstream infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Should Blood Cultures Be Drawn Through an Indwelling Catheter?

There is no practical way to definitively diagnose a catheter-related bloodstream infection in situ if blood cultures are only obtained percutaneously unless there is the rare occurrence of purulent drainage from a central venous catheter insertion site. That is why the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for diagnosis and management of catheter-related bloodstream infections and Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for evaluation of fever in critically ill patients both recommend drawing blood cultures from a central venous catheter and percutaneously if the catheter is a suspected source of infection. However, central venous catheter-drawn blood cultures may be more likely to be positive reflecting catheter hub, connector, or intraluminal colonization, and many hospitals in the United States discourage blood culture collection from catheters in an effort to reduce reporting of central-line associated bloodstream infections to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As such, clinical decisions are made regarding catheter removal or other therapeutic interventions based on incomplete and potentially inaccurate data. We urge clinicians to obtain catheter-drawn blood cultures when the catheter may be the source of suspected infection.

Disinfection of vascular catheter connectors that are protected by antiseptic caps is unnecessary

OBJECTIVE

Determination of whether vascular catheter disinfecting antiseptic-containing caps alone are effective at decreasing microbial colonization of connectors compared to antiseptic-containing caps plus a 5-second alcohol manual disinfection.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a 718-bed, tertiary-care, academic hospital.

PATIENTS

A convenience sample of adult patients across intensive care units and acute care wards with peripheral and central venous catheters covered with antiseptic-containing caps.

METHODS

Quality improvement study completed over 5 days. The standard-of-care group consisted of catheter connectors with antiseptic-containing caps cleaned with a 5-second alcohol wipe scrub prior to culture. The comparison group consisted of catheter connectors with antiseptic-containing caps without a 5-second alcohol wipe scrub prior to culture. The connectors were pressed directly onto blood agar plates and incubated. Plates were assessed for growth after 48-72 hours.

RESULTS

In total, 356 catheter connectors were cultured: 165 in the standard-of-care group, 165 in the comparison group, and 26 catheters connectors without an antiseptic-containing cap, which were designated as controls. Overall, 18 catheter connectors (5.06%) yielded microbial growth. Of the 18 connectors with microbial growth, 2 (1.21%) were from the comparison group, 1 (0.61%) was from the standard-of-care group, and 15 were controls without an antiseptic-containing cap.

CONCLUSIONS

Bacterial colonization rates were similar between the catheter connectors cultured with antiseptic-containing caps alone and catheter connectors with antiseptic-containing caps cultured after a 5-second scrub with alcohol. This finding suggests that the use of antiseptic-containing caps precludes the need for additional disinfection.

Effectiveness of Disinfecting Caps for Intravenous Access Points in Reducing Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections, Clinical Utilization, and Cost of Care During COVID-19

Purpose

Intravenous (IV) access point protectors, serving as passive disinfection devices and a cover between line accesses, are available to help reduce the risk of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). This low-maintenance disinfection solution is particularly valuable in situations with excessive workloads. This study examined the effect of a disinfecting cap for an IV access point on CLABSI rates, hospital length of stay, and cost of care in an inpatient setting during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Methods

The study utilized data from the Premier Healthcare Database, focusing on 200,411 hospitalizations involving central venous catheters between January 2020 and September 2020. Among these cases, 7423 patients received a disinfecting cap, while 192,988 patients did not use any disinfecting caps and followed the standard practice of hub scrubbing. The two cohorts, Disinfecting Cap and No-Disinfecting Cap groups, were compared in terms of CLABSI rates, hospital length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization costs. The analysis accounted for baseline group differences and random clustering effects by employing a 34-variable propensity score and mixed-effect multiple regression, respectively.

Results

The findings demonstrated a significant 73% decrease in CLABSI rates (p= 0.0013) in the Disinfecting Cap group, with an adjusted CLABSI rate of 0.3% compared to 1.1% in the No-Disinfecting Cap group. Additionally, the Disinfecting Cap group exhibited a 0.5-day reduction in hospital stay (9.2 days versus 9.7 days; p = 0.0169) and cost savings of $6703 ($35,604 versus $42,307; p = 0.0063) per hospital stay compared to the No-Disinfecting Cap group.

Conclusion

This study provides real-world evidence that implementing a disinfecting cap to protect IV access points effectively reduces the risk of CLABSIs in hospitalized patients compared to standard care, ultimately optimizing the utilization of healthcare resources, particularly in situations where the healthcare system is under significant strain or overloaded.

Engineering Photo-Crosslinked Antimicrobial Coating to Tackle Catheter-Associated Infections In Vivo

Microbial colonization on urinary and intravascular catheter surfaces results in steeply rising cases of catheter-associated infections as well as blood stream infections. Currently marketed efforts include impregnation and loading of antimicrobials and antiseptics that leach out into the local environment and inactivate microbes. However, they suffer from uncontrolled release, induction of resistance, and undesired toxicity. Here, in this manuscript, we have developed a photocurable, covalent coating on catheters using quaternary benzophenone-based amide (QSM-1). The coating was found to be active against drug-resistant bacteria and fungi. The coating inactivated stationary and persister cells of superbug MRSA and inhibited the formation of biofilms with retained activity against broad-spectrum bacteria when challenged in realistic urinary conditions. The coating was seen to be biocompatible in vitro and in vivo. Remarkably, the coated catheters showed reduced fouling and >99.9% reduction in bacterial burden when implanted in vivo in a mice model of subcutaneous implantation. We conceive the possibility of application of QSM-1-coated catheters in the healthcare settings to tackle the notorious catheter-associated nosocomial infections.

Determination of microbial contamination on the outer surface of needleless connectors before and after disinfection

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine bacterial contamination of needleless connectors before and after disinfection to assess the risk for the point of catheter-related bloodstream infections.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/DESIGN

Experimental study design.

SETTING

The research was carried out on patients with a central venous catheter hospitalized in the intensive care unit.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Bacterial contamination of needleless connectors integrated into central venous catheters was assessed before and after disinfection. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of colonized isolates were investigated. In addition, the compatibility of the isolates with the bacteriological cultures of the patients was determined over a one-month period.

RESULTS

Bacterial contamination varied between 5×10³ and 1×10⁵ colony forming unit was detected before disinfection in 91.7% of needleless connectors. Most common bacteria were coagulase-negative staphylococci; others were Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis, and Corynebacterium species. While most isolates were resistant to penicillin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, cefoxitin, and linezolid, each was susceptible to vancomycin or teicoplanin. Bacterial survival was not detected on needleless connectors after disinfection. There was no compatibility between the one-month bacteriological culture results of the patients and the bacteria isolated from the needleless connectors.

CONCLUSION

Bacterial contamination was detected on the needleless connectors before disinfection, although they were not rich in bacterial diversity. There was no bacterial growth after disinfection with an alcohol-impregnated swab.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

The majority of needleless connectors had bacterial contamination before disinfection. Needleless connectors should be disinfected for 30 seconds before use, particularly in immunocompromised patients. However, the use of needleless connectors with antiseptic barrier caps may be a more practical and effective solution instead.

Antiseptic barrier caps to prevent central line-associated bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Reliable and safe venous access is crucial for patients using central venous catheters (CVC). However, such CVCs carry a risk for central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). Antiseptic barrier caps (ABCs) are a novel tool in the armamentarium for CVC disinfection. Our aim was to review the efficacy and safety of ABCs.

METHOD

A literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and CINAHL. Primary aim was to compare CLABSI rates in patients using ABCs versus standard care. Secondary aims included efficacy of ABCs in relevant subgroups (age, ABC brand, clinical setting), safety, compliance, and costs. Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 391 CLABSIs in 273,993 catheter days occurred in the intervention group versus 620 CLABSIs in 284,912 days in the standard care group, resulting in a risk ratio of 0.65 (95%CI 0.55-0.76; P<0.00001). Subgroup analyses showed similar effects, except for non-intensive care unit. In general, ABCs were safe, highly appreciated by patients and caregivers, and cost-effective, while compliance was easy to monitor. In most studies, a substantial risk of bias was observed.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, while available evidence suggests that ABCs are effective, safe, easy in use, and cost-effective. However, due to the poor methodological quality of most available studies, more robust data should justify their use at this point.