Devastating coagulase-negative staphylococcal septicaemia in an extremely low birth weight infant

Impact of daily octenidine skin washing versus nonwashing on antiseptic tolerance of coagulase-negative staphylococci in two neonatal intensive care units with different skin cleansing practices

Background

There is wide variation in practices regarding routine bathing/washing of babies in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Evidence is lacking as to the benefit of routine antiseptic washes for reducing infection. We aimed to compare the antiseptic tolerance of Coagulase Negative Staphylococci (CoNS) within two UK NICUs with very different approaches to skin washing.

Methods

We compared antiseptic susceptibility of CoNS isolated from skin swabs of neonates admitted to the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (NNUH) NICU in December 2017-March 2018 with those isolated in the Bradford Royal Infirmary (BRI) NICU in January-March 2020. The NNUH does not practise routine whole-body washing whereas BRI practises daily whole-body washing from post-menstrual age 27 weeks using Octenisan wash lotion (0.3% octenidine; 1 minute contact time before washing off with sterile water). A total of 78 CoNS isolates from BRI and 863 from the NNUH were tested for susceptibility against the antiseptics octenidine (OCT) and chlorhexidine (CHX).

Results

Isolates from the BRI with practice of routine washing did not show increased antiseptic tolerance to OCT or CHX. Isolates from the NNUH which does not practise routine whole-body washing and rarely uses octenidine, were comparatively less susceptible to both CHX and OCT antiseptics.

Conclusions

Daily whole-body skin washing with OCT does not appear to select for CoNS isolates that are antiseptic tolerant towards OCT and CHX. There remains considerable uncertainty about the impact of different antiseptic regimes on neonatal skin microbiota, the benefit of routine washing, and the development of antiseptic tolerance in the NICU.

2% chlorhexidine gluconate aqueous versus 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol for skin disinfection prior to percutaneous central venous catheterisation: the ARCTIC randomised controlled feasibility trial

OBJECTIVE

Catheter-related sepsis (CRS) is a major complication with significant morbidity and mortality. Evidence is lacking regarding the most appropriate antiseptic for skin disinfection before percutaneous central venous catheter (PCVC) insertion in preterm neonates. To inform the feasibility and design of a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) of two antiseptic formulations, we conducted the Antiseptic Randomised Controlled Trial for Insertion of Catheters (ARCTIC) feasibility study to assess catheter colonisation, sepsis, and skin morbidity.

DESIGN

Feasibility RCT.

SETTING

Two UK tertiary-level neonatal intensive care units.

PATIENTS

Preterm infants born <34 weeks' gestation scheduled to undergo PCVC insertion.

INTERVENTIONS

Skin disinfection with either 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-aqueous or 2% CHG-70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) before PCVC insertion and at removal.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Proportion in the 2% CHG-70% IPA arm with a colonised catheter at removal.

MAIN FEASIBILITY OUTCOMES

Rates of: (1) CRS, catheter-associated sepsis (CAS), and CRS/CAS per 1,000 PCVC days; (2) recruitment and retention; (3) data completeness.

SAFETY OUTCOMES

Daily skin morbidity scores recorded from catheter insertion until 48 hours post-removal.

RESULTS

116 babies were randomised. Primary outcome incidence was 4.1% (95% confidence interval: 0.9% to 11.5%). Overall catheter colonisation rate was 5.2% (5/97); CRS 2.3/1000 catheter days; CAS 14.8/1000 catheter days. Recruitment, retention and data completeness were good. No major antiseptic-related skin injury was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

A definitive comparative efficacy trial is feasible, but the very low catheter colonisation rate would make a large-scale RCT challenging due to the very large sample size required. ARCTIC provides preliminary reassurance supporting potential safe use of 2% CHG-70% IPA and 2% CHG-aqueous in preterm neonates.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN82571474.

Safety and efficacy of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate aqueous versus 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol for skin disinfection prior to percutaneous central venous catheter insertion in preterm neonates: the ARCTIC randomised-controlled feasibility trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Catheter-related sepsis is one of the most dangerous complications of neonatal intensive care and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Use of catheter-care 'bundles' has reduced the incidence of catheter-related sepsis, although individual components have not been well studied. Better evidence is needed to guide selection of the most appropriate antiseptic solution for skin disinfection in preterm neonates. This study will inform the feasibility and design of the first randomised controlled trial to examine the safety and efficacy of alcohol-based versus aqueous-based chlorhexidine antiseptic formulations for skin disinfection prior to percutaneous central venous catheterisation in preterm neonates. The antiseptics to be compared are 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) aqueous and 2% CHG in 70% isopropyl alcohol.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Antiseptic Randomised Controlled Trial for Insertion of Catheters (ARCTIC) is a two-centre randomised-controlled feasibility trial. At least 100 preterm infants born at <34 weeks' gestation and due to undergo percutaneous insertion of a central venous catheter will be randomly allocated to receive prior skin disinfection with one of the two antiseptic solutions. Outcomes include: i) recruitment and retention rates; ii) completeness of data collection; iii) numbers of enrolled infants meeting case definitions for definite catheter-related sepsis, catheter-associated sepsis and catheter colonisation and iv) safety outcomes of skin morbidity scores recorded daily from catheter insertion until 48 hours post removal. The key feasibility metrics will be reported as proportions with 95% CIs. Estimated prevalence of catheter colonisation will allow calculation of sample size for the large-scale trial. The data will inform whether it will be feasible to progress to a large-scale trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

ARCTIC has been approved by the National Health Service Health Research Authority National Research Ethics Service Committee East of England (Cambridge South) (IRAS ID 163868), was adopted onto the National Institute of Health Research Clinical Research Network portfolio (CPMS ID 19899) and is registered with an International Standard Randomised Control Trials Number (ISRCTN: 82571474; Pre-results) and European Clinical Trials Database number 2015-000874-36. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications and sharing of the findings with parents via the support of Bliss baby charity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN82571474; Pre-results.