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

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).

Protect peripheral intravenous catheters: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a novel antimicrobial dressing for peripheral intravenous catheters (ProP trial)

INTRODUCTION

Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are the most commonly used vascular access device in hospitalised patients. Yet PIVCs may be complicated by local or systemic infections leading to increased healthcare costs. Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-impregnated dressings may help reduce PIVC-related infectious complications but have not yet been evaluated. We hypothesise an impregnated CHG transparent dressing, in comparison to standard polyurethane dressing, will be safe, effective and cost-effective in protecting against PIVC-related infectious complications and phlebitis.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The ProP trial is a multicentre, superiority, randomised clinical and cost-effectiveness trial with internal pilot, conducted across three centres in Australia and France. Patients (adults and children aged ≥6 years) requiring one PIVC for ≥48 hours are eligible. We will exclude patients with emergent PIVCs, known CHG allergy, skin injury at site of insertion or previous trial enrolment. Patients will be randomised to 3M Tegaderm Antimicrobial IV Advanced Securement dressing or standard care group. For the internal pilot, 300 patients will be enrolled to test protocol feasibility (eligibility, recruitment, retention, protocol fidelity, missing data and satisfaction of participants and staff), primary endpoint for internal pilot, assessed by independent data safety monitoring committee. Clinical outcomes will not be reviewed. Following feasibility assessment, the remaining 2624 (1312 per trial arm) patients will be enrolled following the same methods. The primary endpoint is a composite of catheter-related infectious complications and phlebitis. Recruitment began on 3 May 2023.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol was approved by Ouest I ethic committee in France and by The Queensland Children's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee in Australia. The findings will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences and publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05741866.

The effectiveness of dressings and securement devices to prevent central venous catheter-associated complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Central venous catheters are commonly used in healthcare, but they come with a range of potential complications. Over the last 15 years, an influx of securement and dressing products has been released, with unknown overall effectiveness to prevent these complications.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of dressings and securement devices for central venous catheters on a range of common complications including catheter-related bloodstream infection, catheter tip colonisation, entry/exit-site infection, skin colonisation, skin irritation, failed catheter securement, dressing durability and mortality.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

METHODS

Following standard Cochrane methods, a systematic search of Cochrane Wounds Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, EBSCO CINAHL, and multiple clinical trial registries was completed in November 2022. Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of dressing and securement devices for all CVC types were included. A random-effects model was used during the meta-analysis. Results were expressed using risk ratio (RR), rate ratio, or mean difference (MD), with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Methodological quality and bias were assessed.

RESULTS

We included 46 studies involving 10,054 participants. All studies had either an unclear or high-performance bias. The blinding of outcome assessment was unclear in most studies. Chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressings, compared with standard polyurethane dressings, may reduce the incidence (7 studies; N = 5816; RR 0.60, 95 % CI 0.44-0.83; low certainty evidence) and rate (4 studies; N = 4447; RR 0.51, 95 % CI 0.32-0.79; moderate certainty evidence) of catheter-related bloodstream infection and catheter tip colonisation (8 studies; N = 4788; RR 0.70, 95 % CI 0.52-0.95; very low certainty evidence). Medication-impregnated dressings may reduce the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection (6 studies; N = 5687; RR 0.60, 95 % CI 0.39-0.93; low certainty evidence) and catheter-tip colonisation (7 studies; N = 4769; RR 0.60, 95 % CI 0.47-0.76; low certainty evidence) relative to non-impregnated dressing types. Tissue adhesive may increase the risk of skin irritation or damage compared with integrated securement dressings (3 studies; N = 166; RR 1.88, 95 % CI 1.09-3.24; low certainty evidence) or sutureless securement devices (4 studies; N = 241; RR 1.64, 95 % CI 1.10-2.44; moderate certainty evidence). Tissue adhesive increased dressing durability compared with integrated securement dressings (MD 43.03 h, 95 % CI 4.88-81.18; moderate certainty evidence) and sutureless securement devices (MD 42.90 h, 4.64-81.16; moderate certainty evidence). Tissue adhesive increased failed catheter securement rate compared with suture (2 studies; N = 103; RR 9.33, 95 % CI 1.10-79.21; moderate certainty evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the review provide insights and guidance for clinicians in selecting the appropriate dressings and securements for catheters. Findings should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity in catheters and patient types.

REGISTRATION

#CD010367.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Time to implement chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressings to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections; a meta-analysis by @GraceNP and team.

Chlorhexidine gluconate-coated gel pad dressings for prevention of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections in patients with hematologic diseases or autologous stem cell transplantation: A registry-based matched-pair analysis

OBJECTIVES

Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-coated gel pad dressings for central venous catheter (CVC) may prevent CVC-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI). However, real-world data showing beneficial effects in patients with hematologic malignancies are scarce.

METHODS

In a matched-pair analysis with data from a multicenter CVC registry, non-tunneled jugular and subclavian vein CVC in adults with hematologic malignancies or germ cell tumors (including patients receiving autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation [ASCT]) with CHG were compared with non-CHG dressings. The primary endpoint was definite CRBSI rate within 14 days (dCRBSI14) of CVC insertion; secondary endpoints were combined rate of definite or probable CRBSI within 14 days (dpCRBSI14), overall (dpCRBSI), and CRBSI incidences of all estimates.

RESULTS

In total, 2070 CVCs were assessed. There was no statistically significant difference in dCRBSI14 (2.3% vs. 3.5%) between patients with and without CHG gel dressings. Likewise, with regards to dpCRBSI14 (6.2% vs. 6.3%) and the overall dpCRBSI rate (9.2% vs. 10.5%), no significant difference was detected. Furthermore, dCRBSI14 incidence (2.0 vs. 3.2/1000 CVC days), dpCRBSI14 incidence (5.4 vs. 5.6/1000 CVC days), and overall CRBSI incidence (5.5 vs. 6.0/1000 CVC days) showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

CRBSI rates were not reduced by the use of CHG gel dressings in patients with hematologic malignancies and/or ASCT.

Primary prophylaxis of invasive fungal diseases in patients with haematological malignancies: 2022 update of the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

Patients with haematological malignancies (HM) are at high risk of developing invasive fungal disease (IFD) with high morbidity and attributable mortality. We reviewed data published until September 2021 to update the 2017 antifungal prophylaxis recommendations of the German Society of Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO). The strong recommendation to administer antifungal prophylaxis in patients with HM with long-lasting neutropenia, i.e. <500 cells/μL for >7 days remains unchanged. Posaconazole remains the drug of choice for mould-active prophylaxis in these patients. Novel treatment options in HM, such as CAR-T-cell treatment or novel targeted therapies for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) were considered, however, data are insufficient to give general recommendations for routine antifungal prophylaxis in these patients. Major changes regarding specific recommendations compared to the 2017 edition are the now moderate instead of mild support for the recommendations of isavuconazole and voriconazole. Furthermore, published evidence on micafungin allows recommending it at moderate strength for its use in HM. For the first time we included recommendations for non-pharmaceutical measures regarding IFD, comprising the use of high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, smoking, measures during construction work and neutropenic diets. We reviewed the impact of antifungal prophylaxis with triazoles on drug-drug interactions with novel targeted therapies that are metabolized via cytochrome p450 where triazoles inhibit CYP3A4/5. The working group recommends reducing the dose of venetoclax when used concomitantly with strong CYP3A4 inhibiting antifungals. Furthermore, we reviewed data on the prophylactic use of novel antifungal agents. Currently there is no evidence to support their use in a prophylactic setting in clinical practice.

Impact of Persistent Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteremia on Clinical Outcome and Mortality

The clinical aspects of persistent bacteremia (PB) caused by gram-negative rods (GNRs) in terms of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and PB clearance status are unclear. This secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort study investigated differences in PB caused by Enterobacterales and glucose non-fermentative GNRs (NF-GNRs) based on AMR and PB clearance. We retrospectively surveyed medical records at Tohoku University Hospital. Patients for whom blood cultures were performed between January 2012 and December 2021 were recruited. PB cases were grouped based on AMR and PB clearance; the characteristics of PB due to each bacterial pathogen were examined. The main outcome variable was mortality. The late (30-90-day) mortality rate was significantly higher in the multidrug-resistant (MDR) group than in the non-MDR group for Enterobacterales. However, no significant difference was noted in mortality rates between NF-GNRs with and without AMR. Mortality rates tended to be higher in the non-PB-clearance group than in the clearance group for both Enterobacterales and NF-GNRs. Since the mortality rate was higher in the MDR group in the case of Enterobacterales PB, more careful management is necessary for this condition. Follow-up blood cultures and confirming the clearance of PB are useful for improving the survival rate.

Asia-Pacific guidelines for standardization of appropriate selection, placement, and management of vascular access devices

Vascular access devices (VADs) are common and essential in the healthcare setting. However, several factors influence VAD selection and management. Wide variations in VAD practices and the degree of VAD awareness are noted across Asia-Pacific (APAC) countries. An international panel was convened that applied the ASA 2020 method to develop standard criteria for use of VADs in the APAC region. After a literature search, scenarios related to VAD use, care, and maintenance were developed according to the patient population, indication for insertion, and duration of use. These scenarios were rated on a scale of 1-5 (1 being strongly disagreed and 5 strongly agreed) by 11 expert members. A total of 48 clinical scenarios were developed: 23 in hospitalized patients, 3 in critical patients, 4 in cancer settings, 7 pertinent to VAD placement, and 11 for VAD maintenance. The multidisciplinary panel generated several recommendations for the use, care, and management of VADs across general hospitalized patients with or without difficult venous access, critically ill patients, patients with malignancy, patients with different stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) with or without dialysis, and in other special populations through evidence-based standards. These recommendations may help in achieving uniformity in practice patterns and improving the quality of VAD care and quality of life of patients in APAC region.

Comparative Effectiveness of 2 Chlorhexidine Gluconate-Containing Dressings in Reducing Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections, Hospital Stay, and Costs

Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-containing dressings are recommended to prevent central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and other catheter-related infections. This study compared the effect of 2 CHG dressings on CLABSI, cost of care, and contact dermatitis. A retrospective analysis was conducted using the Premier Healthcare Database of hospitalized patients (n = 53 149) with central venous catheters (CVCs) and receiving either a transparent CHG gel dressing (n = 14 488) or an opaque CHG sponge dressing (n = 38 661) between January 2019 and September 2020. Two cohorts (n = 14 488 each), CHG-Gel and CHG-Sponge, were matched 1:1 using a propensity score method on 33 patient and facility characteristics. CLABSI and contact dermatitis rates, hospital length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization costs were compared using mixed-effect multiple regression. This approach effectively controlled for random clustering effects across hospitals and patients' Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) classifications. CHG gel dressings were associated with a 41% decrease in CLABSI rates (P = .0008) compared to CHG sponge dressings (0.35%vs 0.60%). A 0.4-day shorter LOS (9.53vs 9.90 days, P = .0001) and a cost saving of $3576 per hospital stay ($40 197 vs $43 774, P = .0179) was observed with CHG gel dressing use. There was no statistically significant difference in contact dermatitis rates (P = .7854) between the CHG-Gel and CHG-Sponge cohorts. The findings of this study suggest that the use of CHG gel dressings may be more effective in reducing the risk of CLABSIs and associated clinical costs compared to CHG sponge dressings in hospitalized patients. Moreover, there appears to be no significant discrepancy in contact dermatitis rates between CHG gel and CHG sponge dressings. Healthcare providers may consider using CHG gel dressings as a standard practice for patients with CVCs to reduce the risk of infections and improve patient outcomes.

Scheduled removal of central venous catheters (CVC) to prevent CVC-related bloodstream infections in patients with hematological disease or autologous stem cell transplantation: a registry-based randomized simulation-study

Although not generally recommended, scheduled central venous catheter (CVC) removal is sometimes carried out in order to reduce the CVC-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) incidence. We conducted a simulation for scheduled CVC removal within the multicenter CRBSI registry (SECRECY). Non-tunneled jugular and subclavian CVC in patients with hematological disease or with germ cell tumors (including patients receiving autologous stem cell transplantation [SCT]) were included. Cases were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to either a simulated, scheduled CVC removal after 7, 14, and 21 days, or to non-simulated, unscheduled CVC removal (control group). The primary endpoint was definitive CRBSI incidence for a scheduled CVC removal after 14 days (dCRBSI-D14_rmv). Among other, secondary endpoints were definite CRBSI incidence for a scheduled removal after 7 days (dCRBSI-D7_rmv) and 21 days (dCRBSI-D21_rmv). Data on 2984 CVC were included. Patients’ median age was 59 (range 16–95) years, 58.8% being male. The vast majority (98.4%) were patients with hematological malignancies. Jugular veins were the main insertion site (93.2%). dCRBSI-D14_rmv was 3.10/1000 CVC days as compared to 4.15/1000 CVC days in the control group (p = 0.23). There was a significant difference between dCRBSI-D7_rmv (0.86/1000 CVC days) and controls (p < 0.001), but not between dCRBSI-D21_rmv (4.10/1000 CVC days) and controls (p = 0.96). Our data suggest that in patients with hematological diseases or autologous SCT recipients scheduled CVC removal after 14 days does not result in a lower CRBSI incidence compared to unscheduled removal.

Trial registration: DRKS00006551, 2014/09/29, retrospectively registered.

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.

Effectiveness of chlorhexidine dressings to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections. Does one size fit all? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Objective:

To evaluate the effectiveness of chlorhexidine (CHG) dressings to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs).

Design:

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods:

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies (randomized controlled and quasi-experimental trials) with the following criteria: patients with short- or long-term catheters; CHG dressings were used in the intervention group and nonantimicrobial dressings in the control group; CRBSI was an outcome. Random-effects models were used to obtain pooled risk ratios (pRRs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 test and the Cochran Q statistic.

Results:

In total, 20 studies (18 randomized controlled trials; 15,590 catheters) without evidence of publication bias and mainly performed in intensive care units (ICUs) were included. CHG dressings significantly reduced CRBSIs (pRR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58–0.87), independent of the CHG dressing type used. Benefits were limited to adults with short-term central venous catheters (CVCs), including onco-hematological patients. For long-term CVCs, CHG dressings decreased exit-site/tunnel infections (pRR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.22–0.64). Contact dermatitis was associated with CHG dressing use (pRR, 5.16; 95% CI, 2.09–12.70); especially in neonates and pediatric populations in whom severe reactions occurred. Also, 2 studies evaluated and did not find CHG-acquired resistance.

Conclusions:

CHG dressings prevent CRBSIs in adults with short-term CVCs, including patients with an onco-hematological disease. CHG dressings might reduce exit-site and tunnel infections in long-term CVCs. In neonates and pediatric populations, proof of CHG dressing effectiveness is lacking and there is an increased risk of serious adverse events. Future studies should investigate CHG effectiveness in non-ICU settings and monitor for CHG resistance.

Practice Guidelines for Central Venous Access 2020

These practice guidelines update the Practice Guidelines for Central Venous Access: A Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Central Venous Access, adopted by the American Society of Anesthesiologists in 2011 and published in 2012. These updated guidelines are intended for use by anesthesiologists and individuals under the supervision of an anesthesiologist and may also serve as a resource for other physicians, nurses, or healthcare providers who manage patients with central venous catheters.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

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.

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.

Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing for the prophylaxis of central venous catheter-related complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated the role of Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing for prophylaxis of central venous catheter (CVC) related complications, but the results remained inconsistent, updated meta-analyses on this issue are warranted.

Methods

A meta-analysis on the RCTs comparing Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing versus other dressing or no dressing for prophylaxis of central venous catheter-related complications was performed. A comprehensive search of major databases was undertaken up to 30 Dec 2018 to identify related studies. Pooled odd ratio (OR) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using either a fixed-effects or random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify the source of heterogeneity, and funnel plot and Egger test was used to identify the publication bias.

Results

A total of 12 RCTs with 6028 patients were included. The Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings provided significant benefits in reducing the risk of catheter colonization (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.58), decreasing the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) (OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.85). Subgroup analysis indicated that the Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings were conducive to reduce the risk of catheter colonization and CRBSI within the included RCTs with sample size more than 200, but the differences weren’t observed for those with sample less than 200. No publication bias was observed in the Egger test for the risk of CRBSI.

Conclusions

Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing is beneficial to prevent CVC-related complications. Future studies are warranted to assess the role and cost-effectiveness of Chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings.

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.

Chlorhexidine-impregnated gel dressing compared with transparent polyurethane dressing in the prevention of catheter-related infections in critically ill adult patients: A pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In patients with short-term percutaneous central venous catheter (CVC), it is recommended that a dressing be applied to the catheter insertion site to prevent catheter-related infections.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial to compare the efficacy of chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing with that of polyurethane dressing in the prevention of catheter-related infections in critically ill adult patients with short-term percutaneous CVC.

METHODS

One hundred fifteen patients with a CVC were randomised to chlorhexidine-impregnated gel dressing (chlorhexidine gel group) or transparent polyurethane dressing (polyurethane group) between April and December 2014. Feasibility outcomes included data on eligibility, recruitment, missing data, and protocol violation. The primary outcome measure of efficacy was the presence of colonisation with the same microorganism in both the skin swab around catheter insertion site and the catheter tip.

RESULTS

Of 526 patients assessed for eligibility, 411 (78%) did not meet inclusion criteria, and 115 (22%) were randomised. Among participants of both groups, there were 14 missing primary outcomes of which 10 were due to failure to collect the catheter tip (a protocol violation). The final sample had 47 and 54 individuals in the chlorhexidine and polyurethane groups, respectively. Skin and catheter tip were colonised by the same microorganism for 13% of the participants in the chlorhexidine group and 8% in the polyurethane group, although the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.51). There were no differences between the two groups for catheter tip colonisation, skin site colonisation, catheter insertion site infection, catheter-related bloodstream infection, skin irritation, and the number of unplanned dressing changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary results found that a large randomised controlled trial would be feasible. This study provides valuable information that can be used to design more robust studies to prevent infection among patients with short-term percutaneous CVC when using either chlorhexidine or polyurethane dressing.

Chlorhexidine-containing dressings in the prevention of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections: A cost and resource utilization analysis

BACKGROUND

A recent study reported a reduction in probable/definite central venous catheter (CVC)-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) in neutropenic high-risk patients using CVC dressings with a chlorhexidine-containing gel pad.

METHODS

Based on published data, a health-economic analysis was performed to analyze the economic effect of using CVC dressings with a chlorhexidine-containing gel pad compared to non-chlorhexidine control dressings. A micro-costing approach was used to determine CRBSI-related direct treatment cost factors.

RESULTS

Between February 2012 and September 2014, 356 patients (178 patients in both groups) were analyzed. Distribution of probable and definite CRBSI in the chlorhexidine group and control group were 12 (7%) vs 18 (10%) and 9 (5%) vs 21 (12%), respectively (P = .011). Median overall length of stay (25 vs 27.5 days; P = .630) and days on treatment with antibacterials (10 vs 12 days; P = .140) were similar between the chlorhexidine and control groups. The most important cost driver in both groups was treatment on general ward (€4275 [US$ 5173], interquartile range [IQR]: €592 - €6504 [US$ 716 - US$ 7871] vs €4560 [US$ 5518], IQR: €1227 - €8567 [US$ 1485 - US$ 10,367]; P = .120), resulting in median overall direct treatment costs of €13,881 (US$ 16,798) [IQR: €10,922 - €25,457 (US$ 13,217 - US$ 30,807) vs €13,929 [US$ 16,856] [IQR: €11,295 - €23,561 (US$ 13,669 - US$ 28,512); P = .640]).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows similar results in overall direct treatment costs, meaning that higher acquisition costs of chlorhexidine-containing dressings did not translate into higher costs. Expenses were primarily outweighed by a lower rate of probable/definite CRBSI and reduced associated costs.