Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic nasal mupirocin in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis based on a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Effect of Preventing Staphylococcus Aureus Carriage on Rates of Peritoneal Catheter-Related Staphylococcal Infections. Literature Synthesis

Objective

To determine whether specific preventive measures reduce the rate of peritoneal catheter-related infections and peritoneal catheter loss due to Staphylococcus aureus.

Design

Structured literature synthesis.

Methods

Relevant studies were identified by medline search, from personal files, and from the reference lists of retrieved articles. We analyzed English-language studies on treatment targeted at S. aureus, with at least 10 subjects and at least 3 months of follow-up, and data on staphylococcal peritoneal dialysis catheter infections. We excluded noncontrolled studies. Two investigators abstracted data using a structured form.

Results

W e evaluated six studies with concurrent controls and eight studies with historical controls. In one randomized, placebo-controlled, blinded study, periodic nasal mupirocin ointment reduced the rate of staphylococcal exit-site infection from 0.42 to 0.12 episodes/patient-year ( p = 0.006), but had no effect on the rates of staphylococcal tunnel infection, peritonitis, or catheter loss. In one randomized study without placebo control, periodic oral rifampin reduced the rate of staphylococcal exit-site infection from 0.65 to 0.22 epi/pt-yr ( p = 0.011), but had no effect on the rate of staphylococcal peritonitis. In another nonblinded, randomized, controlled study, the use of either rifampin or mupirocin was associated with low rates of staphylococcal catheter infections and catheter loss. In one study with historical controls, the rate of staphylococcal exit-site infection and peritonitis was lower after oral rifampin prophylaxis. In seven other studies comparing nasal or exit-site mupirocin to historical controls, the rate of staphylococcal exit-site infection decreased from 0.17 to 0.05 epi/pt-yr, the rate of staphylococcal peritonitis decreased from 0.18 to 0.06 epi/pt-yr, and the rate of catheter loss decreased from 0.09 to 0.05 epi/pt-yr during the mupirocin period.

Conclusion

The literature provides strong evidence that staphylococcal carriage prophylaxis using either oral rifampin or mupirocin ointment in the nares or exit site reduces significantly the rate of exit-site infection due to Staphylococcus aureus. Weaker evidence based on studies with historical controls suggests that rifampin or mupirocin prophylaxis also reduces the rate of staphylococcal peritonitis and peritoneal catheter loss. Studies with a stronger level of evidence are needed to verify this last point.

Emergence of Mupirocin-ResistantStaphylococcus Aureusin Chronic Peritoneal Dialysis Patients using Mupirocin Prophylaxis to Prevent Exit-Site Infection

Objective

To determine the prevalence of the carriage of Staphylococcus aureus (SA), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and mupirocin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MuRSA) in chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) patients after 4 years of prophylactic mupirocin application to the exit site, in a peritoneal dialysis unit.

Methods

Three swabs were collected from the nares, axillae/groin, and exit site, respectively, from 149 patients on CPD between May and July 2001. All swabs were cultured on solid selective agar (mannitol salt agar) and in mannitol salt broth. Staphylococcus aureus isolates were tested for methicillin resistance using oxacillin screening plates, and mupirocin resistance using E-test strips. Low-level MuRSA was defined as minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of 4 mg/mL or more, and high-level MuRSA as MIC of 256 mg/mL or more.

Results

Staphylococcus aureus was isolated from 26 (17%) patients (25 from nares/axilla/groin, and 1 from the exit site). High-level MuRSA was isolated from 4 patients (3% of the total study population; 15% of total SA isolates). No MRSA was detected. One patient with high-level MuRSA had peritonitis due to SA, resulting in treatment failure and catheter loss, soon after the swabs were collected for the study.

Conclusion

We report the emergence of high-level MuRSA in CPD patients after a 4-year practice of continuous use of mupirocin in a small number of patients in our unit. Our results may have significant implications for the future practice of prophylactic use of mupirocin by CPD patients to prevent exit-site infection.

Effect of Local Mupirocin Application on Exit-Site Infection and Peritonitis in an Indian Peritoneal Dialysis Population

Background

Staphylococcus aureus-associated peritonitis and catheter exit-site infections (ESIs) are important causes of hospitalization and catheter loss in patients undergoing chronic peritoneal dialysis. Intranasal and topical use of mupirocin has been found to be an effective strategy in decreasing S. aureus-related infectious complications in persons who are carriers of S. aureus; however, there is no consensus regarding the prophylactic use of mupirocin irrespective of carrier status. We aimed to determine the potential effectiveness of application of mupirocin cream at the catheter exit site in preventing ESI and peritonitis irrespective of carrier status in a tropical country such as India.

Methods

This prospective historically controlled study was done in a total of 40 patients. From August 2003, all patients, incident and prevalent, were instructed to apply 2% mupirocin cream daily to the exit site instead of the older practice of povidone-iodine and gauze dressing. Patients were not screened to determine whether they were S. aureus carriers. The infection-related data for 1 year, until July 2004, were compared with the historical control, which was infection-related data for the year preceding the year of mupirocin application.

Results

Mean age of the study population was 62 years, with 61.8% being male and 64.3% being diabetic. Local application of mupirocin led to a significant reduction in the incidence density per patient-month of both ESI and peritonitis compared to controls (0.15 vs 0.37 and 0.37 vs 0.67, p = 0.01 for both). This amounted to a relative reduction of 60.5% and 55% respectively. ESI and peritonitis due to S. aureus were also significantly lower in the study group compared to controls (incidence density per patient-month 0.05 vs 0.13 and zero vs 0.17 respectively, p < 0.01 for both). There occurred no catheter removal due to infection-related complications during the study period compared to two during the control period. None of the patients reported a mupirocin-related adverse effect.

Conclusions

Daily application of mupirocin at the exit site is a well-tolerated and effective strategy in reducing the incidence of ESI and peritonitis in a tropical country such as India. It can thus significantly reduce morbidity, catheter loss, and transfer to hemodialysis in peritoneal dialysis patients.

Infection Prophylaxis in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients: Results from an Australia/New Zealand Survey

Background

Clinical practice guidelines aim to reduce the rates of peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related infections, a common complication of PD in end-stage kidney disease patients. We describe the clinical practices used by Australian and New Zealand nephrologists to prevent PD-related infections in PD patients.

Methods

A survey of PD practices in relation to the use of antibiotic and antifungal prophylaxis in PD patients was conducted of practicing nephrologists identified via the Australia and New Zealand Society of Nephrology (ANZSN) membership in 2013.

Results

Of 333 nephrologists approached, 133 (39.9%) participated. Overall, 127 (95.5%) nephrologists prescribed antibiotics at the time of Tenckhoff catheter insertion, 85 (63.9%) routinely screened for nasal S. aureus carriage, with 76 (88.4%) reporting they treated S. aureus carriers with mupirocin ointment. Following Tenckhoff catheter insertion, 79 (59.4%) prescribed mupirocin ointment at the exit site or intranasally, and 93 (69.9%) nephrologists routinely prescribed a course of oral antifungal agent whenever their PD patients were given a course of antibiotics.

Conclusions

Although the majority of nephrologists prescribe antibiotics at the time of Tenckhoff catheter insertion, less than 70% routinely prescribe mupirocin ointment and/or prophylactic antifungal therapy. This variation in practice in Australia and New Zealand may contribute to the disparity in PD-related infection rates that is seen between units.

Building a Successful Infection Prevention Program: Key Components, Processes, and Economics

Infection control is the discipline responsible for preventing health care-associated infections (HAIs) and has grown from an anonymous field, to a highly visible, multidisciplinary field of incredible importance. There has been increasing focus on prevention rather than control of HAIs. Infection prevention programs (IPPs) have enormous scope that spans multiple disciplines. Infection control and the prevention and elimination of HAIs can no longer be compartmentalized. This article discusses the structure and responsibilities of an IPP, the regulatory pressures and opportunities that these programs face, and how to build and manage a successful program.

Antimicrobial agents for preventing peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an important therapy for patients with end-stage kidney disease and is used in more than 200,000 such patients globally. However, its value is often limited by the development of infections such as peritonitis and exit-site and tunnel infections. Multiple strategies have been developed to reduce the risk of peritonitis including antibiotics, topical disinfectants to the exit site and antifungal agents. However, the effectiveness of these strategies has been variable and are based on a small number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The optimal preventive strategies to reduce the occurrence of peritonitis remain unclear.This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antimicrobial strategies used to prevent peritonitis in PD patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 4 October 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs or quasi-RCTs in patients receiving chronic PD, which evaluated any antimicrobial agents used systemically or locally to prevent peritonitis or exit-site/tunnel infection were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies, randomising 4435 patients, were included. Twenty additional studies have been included in this update. The risk of bias domains were often unclear or high; risk of bias was judged to be low in 19 (49%) studies for random sequence generation, 12 (31%) studies for allocation concealment, 22 (56%) studies for incomplete outcome reporting, and in 12 (31%) studies for selective outcome reporting. Blinding of participants and personnel was considered to be at low risk of bias in 8 (21%) and 10 studies (26%) for blinding of outcome assessors. It should be noted that blinding of participants and personnel was not possible in many of the studies because of the nature of the intervention or control treatment.The use of oral or topical antibiotic compared with placebo/no treatment, had uncertain effects on the risk of exit-site/tunnel infection (3 studies, 191 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.04) and the risk of peritonitis (5 studies, 395 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.19).The use of nasal antibiotic compared with placebo/no treatment had uncertain effects on the risk of exit-site/tunnel infection (3 studies, 338 patients, low quality evidence: RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.87) and the risk of peritonitis (3 studies, 338 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.31).Pre/perioperative intravenous vancomycin compared with no treatment may reduce the risk of early peritonitis (1 study, 177 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.61) but has an uncertain effect on the risk of exit-site/tunnel infection (1 study, 177 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.32).The use of topical disinfectant compared with standard care or other active treatment (antibiotic or other disinfectant) had uncertain effects on the risk of exit-site/tunnel infection (8 studies, 973 patients, low quality evidence, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.33) and the risk of peritonitis (6 studies, 853 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.06).Antifungal prophylaxis with oral nystatin/fluconazole compared with placebo/no treatment may reduce the risk of fungal peritonitis occurring after a patient has had an antibiotic course (2 studies, 817 patients, low quality evidence: RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.63).No intervention reduced the risk of catheter removal or replacement. Most of the available studies were small and of suboptimal quality. Only six studies enrolled 200 or more patients.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this update, we identified limited data from RCTs and quasi-RCTs which evaluated strategies to prevent peritonitis and exit-site/tunnel infections. This review demonstrates that pre/peri-operative intravenous vancomycin may reduce the risk of early peritonitis and that antifungal prophylaxis with oral nystatin or fluconazole reduces the risk of fungal peritonitis following an antibiotic course. However, no other antimicrobial interventions have proven efficacy. In particular, the use of nasal antibiotic to eradicate Staphylococcus aureus, had an uncertain effect on the risk of peritonitis and raises questions about the usefulness of this approach. Given the large number of patients on PD and the importance of peritonitis, the lack of adequately powered and high quality RCTs to inform decision making about strategies to prevent peritonitis is striking.

Alternating Mupirocin/Gentamicin is Associated with Increased Risk of Fungal Peritonitis as Compared with Gentamicin Alone - Results of a Randomized Open-Label Controlled Trial

♦

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Catheter-related infection, namely exit-site infection (ESI) and peritonitis, is a major infectious complication and remains a main cause of technique failure for patients receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD). Topical application of antibiotic cream might reduce catheter-related infection but emergence of resistant or opportunistic organisms could be a concern. Optimal topical agents and regimens remain to be determined. We did a study to examine the effect of an alternating topical antibiotic regimen in preventing catheter-related infection. ♦

METHOD

We performed a single-center, randomized, open-label study to compare daily topical application of gentamicin cream with a gentamicin/mupirocin alternate regimen to the exit site. Patients randomized to alternating regimen were asked to have daily application of gentamicin cream in odd months and mupirocin cream in even months. Primary outcomes were ESI and peritonitis. Secondary outcomes were catheter removal or death caused by catheter-related infection. A total of 146 patients (71, gentamicin group; 75, alternating regimen group) were enrolled with a total follow-up duration of 174 and 181 patient-years for gentamicin and alternating groups, respectively. All patients were followed up until catheter removal, death, transfer to another unit, transplantation or the end of the study on March 31, 2014. There were no significant differences in the age, sex, dialysis vintage, and rate of diabetes, helper-assisted dialysis and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriage state. ♦

RESULTS

No difference was seen in the time to first ESI or peritonitis. However, the time to first gram-negative peritonitis seemed longer for the gentamicin group (p = 0.055). The 2 groups showed a similar rate of ESI (0.17/yr vs 0.19/yr, p = 0.93) but P. aeruginosa ESI was less common in the gentamicin group (0.06/yr vs 0.11/yr, p < 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of ESI due to non-tuberculous mycobacteria. Peritonitis rate was significantly lower in the gentamicin group (0.22/yr vs 0.32/yr, p < 0.001), with a striking decrease in gram-negative peritonitis (0.08/yr vs 0.14/yr, p < 0.001), and fungal peritonitis (0.006/yr vs 0.03/yr, p < 0.001), which was all antibiotics-related episodes with antecedent use of systemic antibiotics for the treatment of catheter-related infections. There was no significant difference in the catheter loss or death related to catheter-related infection. ♦

CONCLUSION

Alternating gentamicin/mupirocin cream application appeared as effective as gentamicin alone in preventing ESI except for P. aeruginosa. However, it was inferior to gentamicin in the prevention of peritonitis episodes, especially for those caused by gram-negative organisms. It was also not useful in reducing catheter-related infection due to opportunistic organisms but instead associated with a higher incidence of antibiotic-related fungal peritonitis.

Antibacterial honey for the prevention of peritoneal-dialysis-related infections (HONEYPOT): a randomised trial

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of evidence to guide the best strategy for prevention of peritoneal-dialysis-related infections. Antibacterial honey has shown promise as a novel, cheap, effective, topical prophylactic agent without inducing microbial resistance. We therefore assessed whether daily application of honey at the exit site would increase the time to peritoneal-dialysis-related infections compared with standard exit-site care plus intranasal mupirocin prophylaxis for nasal carriers of Staphylococcus aureus.

METHODS

In this open-label trial undertaken in 26 centres in Australia and New Zealand, participants undergoing peritoneal dialysis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio with an adaptive allocation algorithm to daily topical exit-site application of antibacterial honey plus standard exit-site care or intranasal mupirocin prophylaxis (only in carriers of nasal S aureus) plus standard exit-site care (control group). The primary endpoint was time to first infection related to peritoneal dialysis (exit-site infection, tunnel infection, or peritonitis). The trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number 12607000537459.

FINDINGS

Of 371 participants, 186 were assigned to the honey group and 185 to the control group. The median peritoneal-dialysis-related infection-free survival times were not significantly different in the honey (16·0 months [IQR not estimable]) and control groups (17·7 months [not estimable]; unadjusted hazard ratio 1·12, 95% CI 0·83-1·51; p=0·47). In the subgroup analyses, honey increased the risks of both the primary endpoint (1·85, 1·05-3·24; p=0·03) and peritonitis (2·25, 1·16-4·36) in participants with diabetes. The incidences of serious adverse events (298 vs 327, respectively; p=0·1) and deaths (14 vs 18, respectively; p=0·9) were not significantly different in the honey and control groups. 11 (6%) participants in the honey group had local skin reactions.

INTERPRETATION

The findings of this trial show that honey cannot be recommended routinely for the prevention of peritoneal-dialysis-related infections.

FUNDING

Baxter Healthcare, Queensland Government, Comvita, and Gambro.

Building a successful infection prevention program: key components, processes, and economics

Infection control is the discipline responsible for preventing nosocomial infections. There has been an increasing focus on prevention rather than control of hospital-acquired infections. Individuals working in infection control have seen their titles change from infection control practitioner to infection control professional and most recently to infection preventionist (IP), emphasizing their critical role in protecting patients. The responsibilities of IPs span multiple disciplines including medicine, surgery, nursing, occupational health, microbiology, pharmacy, sterilization and disinfection, emergency medicine, and information technology. This article discusses the structure and responsibilities of an infection control program and the regulatory pressures and opportunities the program faces.

Mupirocin for preventing exit-site infection and peritonitis in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis

OBJECTIVES

Recently, there have been increasing concerns about the emergence of mupirocin resistance and increased infections due to lowered inhibition of Staphylococcus aureus. We conducted this systemic analysis to find out whether the application of mupirocin was effective for the prevention of exit-site infection (ESI) and peritonitis in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD).

METHODS

Recruited studies met the following criteria: they were randomized controlled trials or historical cohort studies; subjects consisted of adults (age, >or= 18 years) undergoing PD; mupirocin treatment was administered to the therapy group and placebo or no treatment was administered to the control group. The primary extracted data were the difference in the episodes of ESI and peritonitis S. aureus or other organisms among treatment and control groups. Results. Fourteen studies described in 13 articles and a total of 1,233 patients versus 1,217 controls were included in the analysis. Of the 13 articles, 6 were newly published articles that had not been analysed previously and 3 were randomized controlled trials. The application of mupirocin decreased the risk by 72% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.60-0.81] in ESI and by 70% (95% CI 0.52-0.81) in peritonitis due to S. aureus among all patients undergoing PD. Treatment of mupirocin reduced the risks of ESI and peritonitis due to all organisms by 57% (95% CI: 0.46-0.66) and 41% (95% CI: 0.24-0.54), respectively. Based on the six newly published articles, the reduced risk rate for mupirocin therapy was found to be 80% (95% CI: 0.39-0.93, P = 0.004) in ESI and 91% (95% CI: 0.72-0.97, P < 0.0001) in peritonitis due to S. aureus; 70% (95% CI: 0.47-0.82, P < 0.0001) in ESI and 42% (95% CI: 0.25-0.55, P < 0.0001) in peritonitis due to all organisms among mupirocin-treated and -untreated subjects. Based on the three randomized controlled trials, ESI and peritonitis due to S. aureus were found to be reduced by 73% (95% CI: 0.63-0.80, P < 0.0001) and 40% (95% CI: 0.17-0.56, P = 0.002), respectively. Interestingly, although mupirocin treatment can reduce the risk rate of ESI by 46% (95% CI: 0.35-0.55, P < 0.00001), it cannot decrease the risk rate of peritonitis due to all organisms (P = 0.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Mupirocin prophylaxis was effective on preventing ESI and peritonitis due to S. aureus and other organisms in PD patients.

Impact of age on peritonitis risk in peritoneal dialysis patients: an era effect

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Despite reductions in the frequency of peritoneal dialysis (PD)-related infectious complications over time, peritonitis and catheter infection remain important causes of morbidity and mortality. Given the increasing number of elderly patients reaching end-stage renal disease, making informed decisions about PD utilization is contingent on an understanding of the infectious complications of PD in this population. We therefore studied the impact of age on infection rates, organisms and outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND MEASUREMENTS

On the basis of data collected from 1996 to 2005 in the multicenter Baxter Peritonitis Organism Exit sites Tunnel infections database, the study population included 4247 incident Canadian PD patients: 1265 patients aged > or =70 yr and 2982 patients aged <70 yr. We defined two eras of PD initiation: 1996 to 2000 and 2001 to 2005.

RESULTS

In a negative binomial model, older age was independently associated with a higher peritonitis rate (rate ratio [RR] 1.06 per decade increase; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.10; P = 0.008). However, this association was present only among those who initiated PD at an earlier time (RR 1.13 per decade increase; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.20; P < 0.001 in 1996 to 2000 versus 1.01 per decade increase; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.06; P = 0.81 in 2001 to 2005). Catheter-related infections were less frequent with increasing age regardless of era (RR 0.93 per decade increase; 95% CI 0.89 to 0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

The higher peritonitis rate observed in elderly patients may represent an era effect, as age was not associated with peritonitis among patients initiating PD between 2001 and 2005. In addition, catheter infection was less frequent with increasing age.

Impact of prophylactic mupirocin for radical esophagectomy

The preoperative intranasal application of mupirocin significantly decreases the rate of nosocomial S. aureus infections among patients who are S. aureus carriers. However, it remains unclear whether the routine preoperative use of mupirocin would reduce postoperative S. aureus infections, especially methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections, and who would benefit from the prophylactic use of mupirocin. Ninety-six consecutive patients who had undergone elective radical esophagectomy with right thoracotomy and laparotomy were evaluated. Fifty-one patients were given 2% mupirocin calcium ointment 3 times daily over 3 consecutive days before surgery. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors affecting the following three issues: postoperative MRSA infection, postoperative pneumonia, and the length of postoperative hospital stay. In univariate analyses, the preoperative application of mupirocin significantly reduced MRSA infection, postoperative pneumonia, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Multivariate analyses indicated significant associations between mupirocin administration and reductions in both MRSA infection and postoperative pneumonia, but not in length of postoperative hospital stay. Radical esophagectomy with right thoracotomy and laparotomy for esophageal carcinoma warranted the preoperative prophylactic administration of mupirocin in order to reduce postoperative infectious complications from MRSA. Its routine use for such a high-risk procedure is entirely reasonable.

Antimicrobial agents for preventing peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is used as substitutive treatment of renal function in a large proportion (15-50%) of the end-stage kidney disease (ESRD) population. The major limitation is peritonitis which leads to technique failure, hospitalisation and increased mortality. Oral, nasal, topical antibiotic prophylaxis, exit-site disinfectants and other antimicrobial interventions are used to prevent peritonitis.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was to evaluate what evidence supports the use of different antimicrobial approaches to prevent peritonitis in PD.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane CENTRAL Registry (issue 1, 2004), MEDLINE (1966-May 2003), EMBASE (1988-May 2003) and reference lists were searched for RCTs of antimicrobial agents in PD.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials of the following agents were included: antibiotics by any route (oral, nasal, topical), exit-site disinfectants (chlorhexidine, povidone iodine, soap and water), vaccines, and ultraviolet germicidal devices.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted data on the number of patients with one or more episodes and rates of peritonitis and exit-site/tunnel infection, catheter removal, catheter replacement, technique failure, toxicity of antibiotic treatments, all-cause mortality. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen trials, enrolling 1949 patients met our inclusion criteria. Nasal mupirocin compared with placebo significantly reduced the exit-site and tunnel infection rate (one trial, 2716 patient months, RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.85) but not peritonitis rate (one trial, 2716 patient months, RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.60). Perioperative intravenous antibiotics compared with no treatment significantly reduced the risk of early peritonitis (four trials, 335 patients, RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.80) but not exit site and tunnel infection (three trials, 114 patients, RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.02 to 4.81). No intervention reduced the risk of catheter removal or replacement.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates that nasal mupirocin reduces exit-site/tunnel infection but not peritonitis. Preoperative intravenous prophylaxis reduces early peritonitis but not exit-site/tunnel infection. No other antimicrobial interventions have proven efficacy. Given the large number of patients on PD and the importance of peritonitis, the lack of adequately powered RCTs to inform decision making about strategies to prevent peritonitis is striking.

Mupirocin prophylaxis to prevent Staphylococcus aureus infection in patients undergoing dialysis: a meta-analysis

A systematic review of the English-language literature was performed to determine the overall benefit of mupirocin therapy in reducing the rate of Staphylococcus aureus infection among patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). Included studies met the following criteria: they were randomized clinical trials or cohort studies; cohorts consisted of adults (age, > or =18 years) requiring HD or PD; mupirocin therapy was administered to the treatment group, and placebo or no therapy was administered to the control group; and the primary outcome of interest was the difference in the number of S. aureus infections among mupirocin-treated and -untreated patients. Ten studies described in 9 articles were analyzed. A total of 2445 patients were included in the analysis. Use of mupirocin reduced the rate of S. aureus infections by 68% (95% confidence interval [CI], 57%-76%) among all patients undergoing dialysis; risk reductions were 80% (95% CI, 65%-89%) among patients undergoing HD and 63% (95% CI, 50%-73%) among patients undergoing PD. When data were stratified by type of infection, S. aureus bacteremia was found to be reduced by 78% among patients undergoing HD, and peritonitis and exit-site infections were found to be reduced by 66% and 62%, respectively, among patients undergoing PD. Mupirocin prophylaxis substantially reduces the rate of S. aureus infection in the dialysis population. Optimal regimens that minimize the emergence of mupirocin resistance need to be explored.

Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus colonization and prophylaxis for infection with topical intranasal mupirocin: an evidence-based review

Most Staphylococcus aureus infections are endogenously acquired, and treatment of nasal carriage is one potential strategy for prevention. We critically appraised the published evidence regarding the efficacy of intranasal mupirocin for eradication of S. aureus nasal carriage and for prophylaxis of infection. Sixteen randomized, controlled trials were appraised; 9 trials assessed eradication of colonization as a primary outcome measure, and 7 assessed the reduction in the rate of infection. Mupirocin was generally highly effective for eradication of nasal carriage in the short term. Prophylactic treatment of patients with intranasal mupirocin in large trials did not lead to a significant reduction in the overall rate of infections. However, subgroup analyses and several small studies revealed lower rates of S. aureus infection among selected populations of patients with nasal carriage treated with mupirocin. Although mupirocin is effective at reducing nasal carriage, routine use of topical intranasal mupirocin for infection prophylaxis is not supported by the currently available evidence.

Lack of efficacy of mupirocin in the prevention of infections with Staphylococcus aureus in liver transplant recipients and candidates

BACKGROUND

Infections with Staphylococcus aureus are a significant problem in patients in liver transplant units. An association between prior nasal carriage with and subsequent infections has been documented previously in liver transplant recipients and patients with cirrhosis. However, the role of decolonization with mupirocin applied intranasally for the prevention of S. aureus infections in these patients has not been determined.

METHODS

S. aureus nasal carriage was prospectively sought in 70 consecutive liver transplant candidates. Mupirocin two times per day for 5 days was administered to the carriers. Follow-up nasal cultures to document decolonization were performed 5 days after the final application of mupirocin. The primary endpoint was the development of S. aureus infections.

RESULTS

Thirty-one of 70 patients (44%) were found to be nasal carriers and 27 of 31 nasal carriers (87%) were successfully decolonized. However, 12 of 27 patients (37%) successfully decolonized became recolonized with S. aureus, and an additional nine patients who were initially noncarriers became newly colonized with S. aureus during the study period. Despite the use of mupirocin, 16 of 70 patients (23%) developed an infection with S. aureus. No isolate was found to be mupirocin resistant.

CONCLUSION

Elimination of S. aureus nasal carriage by mupirocin did not prevent S. aureus infections in patients in our liver transplant unit.

Clinical effectiveness of different approaches to peritoneal dialysis catheter exit-site care

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to appraise and synthesise the best available evidence on the clinical effectiveness of peritoneal dialysis catheter exit-site care.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review considered all randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effectiveness of peritoneal exit-site care. In the absence of randomised controlled trials, other controlled research designs such as non-randomised controlled trials were considered for inclusion in a narrative summary to enable the identification of current approaches and possible future strategies. Participants of interest were adults with chronic renal failure on maintenance peritoneal dialysis. Interventions of interest were those used to manage peritoneal catheter exit sites, and included types of dressings, frequency of dressings, types of skin care, and use of topical antiseptic or antimicrobial agents.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search sought to find both published and unpublished studies. An initial limited search of MEDLINE and CINAHL databases was undertaken to identify key words contained in the title or abstract, and index terms used to describe relevant articles. A second extensive search was undertaken using all identified key words and index terms. The third step was a search of the reference lists and bibliographies of all relevant articles.

METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY

All identified studies that met the inclusion criteria were assessed for methodological validity by two reviewers prior to inclusion in the review. Critical appraisal of studies focused on identifying bias in selection, performance, attrition and detection.

RESULTS

This review found few studies of sufficient quality to meet the inclusion criteria. The included studies often utilised historical control groups, potentially confounding measurement of their outcomes. The outcome measures varied considerably, thus meta-analysis was not possible.

CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests topical mupirocin may reduce the risk of exit-site infection; however, the clinical effectiveness of any one antibiotic, antiseptic or dressing procedure was not established for the prevention or reduction of exit-site infection rates or peritonitis. This review has underlined large gaps in the existing knowledge on the care of exit sites in patients on peritoneal dialysis.

Dialysis therapies for end-stage renal disease

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) has various causes that may differ according to country and racial group. Whatever the cause, unless the water, salt, electrolytes, and waste products excreted by normal kidneys are removed, their accumulation will result in death. Removal of these products can be variably achieved by either hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The principles and outcomes of these techniques are described, as are their complications. It is important that these two different methods of treatment are not regarded as competitive, but are integrated, together with renal transplantation where appropriate, into the management of patients with ESRD to optimize both outcome and quality of life.

Mupirocin resistance after long-term use for Staphylococcus aureus colonization in patients undergoing chronic peritoneal dialysis

Mupirocin (Mup) has been used extensively to prevent Staphylococcus aureus (SAu) infections in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD). Resistance to Mup has been reported, but its relevance after long-term use of this drug in PD is unknown. Colonization by SAu was treated with topic Mup in our unit between September 1990 and December 2000. Sensitivity to Mup was tested in 437 strains of SAu isolated from 155 PD patients and 62 dialysis partners. Resistance to Mup was classified as low (minimal inhibitory concentration [MIC] > or = 8 microg/mL) or high (MIC > or = 512 microg/mL) degree. MIC90 was 0.125 microg/mL in 1990 to 1996 (5% low, 0% high-degree resistance), 64 microg/mL in 1997 to 1998 (6.6% low, 8.3% high-degree resistance), and 1,024 microg/mL in 1999 to 2000 (2.3% low, 12.4% high-degree resistance). Mup-resistant SAu were isolated from 25 patients and 13 partners a median of 15 months after starting PD. Resistance was associated frequently with repeated treatments of SAu recolonization, but was detected in 3 cases at the start of PD therapy. The accumulated incidence of SAu exit-site infection in the period 1997 to 2000 was 32.3% in patients colonized by Mup-resistant SAu as compared with 14.5% in those colonized by Mup-sensitive SAu (P = 0.03). Mup-resistant SAu have emerged in a significant proportion of our PD patients and dialysis partners. This emergence has resulted in a moderate, but significant, increase in the risk of SAu exit-site infection and raises concerns about the future of Mup as the therapy of choice for SAu colonization in patients undergoing chronic PD.

Staphylococcus aureus infections in dialysis patients: focus on prevention

Staphylococcus aureus infections are a major cause of morbidity and hospitalization in dialysis patients. The risk of infection relates to the type of access. Patients with acute hemodialysis (HD) catheters are at the greatest risk of S. aureus bacteremia, followed by tunneled HD catheters, and grafts. Patients with a fistula have a rate similar to that of peritoneal (PD) patients. In PD patients, however, S. aureus is the second most common cause of peritonitis, is often associated with a catheter infection, and frequently requires catheter removal for resolution. S. aureus infections in dialysis patients are much more common in nasal carriers. S. aureus moves from the nasal reservoir to the hands and skin, and from there to infect the access. Therefore, prevention of infection can be aimed at treating the carriage or in applying antibiotics at the catheter exit site, thus preventing colonization and subsequent infection of the catheter. For HD patients with a permanent access (either fistula or graft), intranasal mupirocin, twice a day for 5 days followed by a once weekly application, is effective in reducing the risk of S. aureus bacteremia. Cost analysis indicates that treating all patients would result in more cost savings than treating just carriers. For patients with acute HD catheters, exit site mupirocin applied as part of routine care during each HD treatment, reduces the risk of S. aureus exit site infection and bacteremia. For PD patients, S. aureus infections can be diminished by using mupirocin at the exit site as part of daily exit site care. Prophylaxis against S. aureus is under utilized in dialysis patients and, if implemented, could lower the rate of these serious infections.

Disinfectants that do

Biocides are helpful in different healthcare settings to reduce or eradicate harmful pathogens on the skin, medical devices, and in the environment. This article reviews recent advances in hand hygiene, instrument sterilization, decolonization with mupirocin, and the challenges posed by environmental contamination, and prion disease. Do biocides induce resistance?