Central Venous Line and Dialysis Catheter Position Affects Drug Clearance during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in an Animal Model

Different distances between central venous catheter tips can affect antibiotic clearance during continuous renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this experimental study was to elucidate whether different distances between central venous catheter tips can affect drug clearance during continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Central venous catheters (CVCs) are widely used in intensive care patients for drug infusion. If a patient receives CRRT, a second central dialysis catheter (CDC) is required. Where to insert CVCs is directed by guidelines, but recommendations regarding how to place multiple catheters are scarce. There are indications that a drug infused in a CVC with the tip close to the tip of the CDC, could be directly aspirated into the dialysis machine, with a risk of increased clearance. However, studies on whether clearance is affected by different CVC and CDC tip positions, when the two catheters are in the same vessel, are few.

METHODS

In this model with 18 piglets, gentamicin (GM) and vancomycin (VM) were infused through a CVC during CRRT. The CVC tip was placed in different positions in relation to the CDC tip from caudal, i.e., proximal to the heart, to cranial, i.e., distal to the heart. Serum and dialysate concentrations were sampled after approximately 30 min of CRRT at four different positions: when the CVC tip was 2 cm caudally (+ 2), at the same level (0), and at 2 (- 2) and 4 (- 4) cm cranially of the tip of the CDC. Clearance was calculated. A mixed linear model was performed, and level of significance was set to p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Clearance of GM had median values at + 2 cm, 0 cm, - 2 cm and - 4 cm of 17.3 (5.2), 18.6 (7.4), 20.0 (16.2) and 26.2 (12.2) ml/min, respectively (p = 0.04). Clearance of VM had median values at + 2 cm, 0 cm, - 2 cm and - 4 cm of 16.2 (4.5), 14.7 (4.9), 19.0 (10.2) and 21.2 (11.4) ml/min, respectively (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The distance between CVC and CDC tips can affect drug clearance during CRRT. A cranial versus a caudal tip position of the CVC in relation to the tip of the CDC led to the highest clearance.

A chronic intermittent haemodialysis pig model for functional evaluation of dialysis membranes

Performance evaluation of new dialysis membranes is primarily performed in vitro, which can lead to differences in clinical results. Currently, data on dialysis membrane performance and safety are available only for haemodialysis patients. Herein, we aimed to establish an in vivo animal model of dialysis that could be extrapolated to humans. We created a bilateral nephrectomy pig model of renal failure, which placed a double-lumen catheter with the hub exposed dorsally. Haemodialysis was performed in the same manner as in humans, during which clinically relevant physiologic data were evaluated. Next, to evaluate the utility of this model, the biocompatibility of two kinds of membranes coated with or without vitamin E used in haemodiafiltration therapy were compared. Haemodialysis treatment was successfully performed in nephrectomized pigs under the same dialysis conditions (4 h per session, every other day, for 2 weeks). In accordance with human clinical data, regular dialysis alleviated renal failure in pigs. The vitamin E-coated membrane showed a significant reduction rate of advanced oxidation protein products during dialysis than non-coated membrane. In conclusion, this model mimics the pathophysiology and dialysis condition of patients undergoing haemodialysis. This dialysis treatment model of renal failure will be useful for evaluating the performance and safety of dialysis membranes.

In an endotoxaemic model, antibiotic clearance can be affected by different central venous catheter positions, during renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

In intensive care, different central venous catheters (CVC) are often used for infusion of drugs. If a patient is treated with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) a second catheter, a central venous dialysis catheter (CVDC), is needed. Placing the catheters close together might pose a risk that a drug infused in a CVC could be directly aspirated into a CRRT machine and cleared from the blood without giving the effect intended. The purpose of this study was to elucidate if drug clearance is affected by different catheter placement, during CRRT. In this endotoxaemic animal model, an infusion of antibiotics was administered in a CVC placed in the external jugular vein (EJV). Antibiotic clearance was compared, whether CRRT was through a CVDC placed in the same EJV, or in a femoral vein (FV). To reach a target mean arterial pressure (MAP), noradrenaline was infused through the CVC and the dose was compared between the CDVDs.

RESULTS

The main finding in this study was that clearance of antibiotics was higher when both catheter tips were in the EJV, close together, compared to in different vessels, during CRRT. The clearance of gentamicin was 21.0 ± 7.3 vs 15.5 ± 4.2 mL/min (p 0.006) and vancomycin 19.3 ± 4.9 vs 15.8 ± 7.1 mL/min (p 0.021). The noradrenaline dose to maintain a target MAP also showed greater variance with both catheters in the EJV, compared to when catheters were placed in different vessels.

CONCLUSION

The results in this study indicate that close placement of central venous catheter tips could lead to unreliable drug concentration, due to direct aspiration, during CRRT.

Antimicrobial Exposure in Critically Ill Patients with Sepsis-Associated Multi-Organ Dysfunction Requiring Extracorporeal Organ Support: A Narrative Review

Sepsis is a leading cause of disability and mortality worldwide. The pathophysiology of sepsis relies on the maladaptive host response to pathogens that fosters unbalanced organ crosstalk and induces multi-organ dysfunction, whose severity was directly associated with mortality. In septic patients, etiologic interventions aiming to reduce the pathogen load via appropriate antimicrobial therapy and the effective control of the source infection were demonstrated to improve clinical outcomes. Nonetheless, extracorporeal organ support represents a complementary intervention that may play a role in mitigating life-threatening complications caused by sepsis-associated multi-organ dysfunction. In this setting, an increasing amount of research raised concerns about the risk of suboptimal antimicrobial exposure in critically ill patients with sepsis, which may be worsened by the concomitant delivery of extracorporeal organ support. Accordingly, several strategies have been implemented to overcome this issue. In this narrative review, we discussed the pharmacokinetic features of antimicrobials and mechanisms that may favor drug removal during renal replacement therapy, coupled plasma filtration and absorption, therapeutic plasma exchange, hemoperfusion, extracorporeal CO₂ removal and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. We also provided an overview of evidence-based strategies that may help the physician to safely prescribe effective antimicrobial doses in critically ill patients with sepsis-associated multi-organ dysfunction who receive extracorporeal organ support.

Concomitant placement of dialysis and infusion catheters in the right internal jugular vein in the intensive care setting: Is it safe?

PURPOSE

This study examined the safety and efficacy of placing both a central venous dialysis catheter and a central venous catheter for infusion in the right internal jugular vein compared to only a central venous dialysis catheter.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review for all adult patients who underwent the placement of the right internal jugular dialysis catheter by a single surgeon. Patients were grouped based on whether they received a tunneled dual lumen dialysis catheter alone or in combination with a central venous infusion catheter in the right internal jugular vein. Catheter-related thrombosis, line infections, line malfunctions, pneumothorax, and need for line replacement were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were 97 patients in the dialysis catheter and central venous infusion line group and 63 patients in the dialysis catheter only group. The two groups were not different with regard to age (62.1 ± 16.3 years vs 57.9 ± 17.6 years) and gender (47.4% male vs 55.6% male). No significant differences were found in the incidence of thrombosis (1.0 % vs 0.0%, p > 0.999), line infection (2.1% vs 0.0%, p = 0.519), or line malfunctions (2.1% vs 0.0%, p = 0.516) in patients who did or did not have a central venous infusion catheter placed concomitantly with the dialysis catheter, respectively. No patients in either group had a pneumothorax.

CONCLUSIONS

Although not currently utilized with frequency, these preliminary data indicate that placing both a dual lumen dialysis catheter and central venous infusion catheter in the right internal jugular simultaneously could be a viable option.