Effect of a second-generation venous catheter impregnated with chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine on central catheter-related infections: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Central venous catheter-related infections are a significant medical problem. Improved preventive measures are needed. OBJECTIVE To ascertain 1) effectiveness of a second-generation antiseptic-coated catheter in the prevention of microbial colonization and infection; 2) safety and tolerability of this device; 3) microbiology of infected catheters; and 4) propensity for the development of antiseptic resistance. DESIGN Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. SETTING 9 university-affiliated medical centers. PATIENTS 780 patients in intensive care units who required central venous catheterization. INTERVENTION Patients received either a standard catheter or a catheter coated with chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine. MEASUREMENTS The authors assessed catheter colonization and catheter-related infection, characterized microbes by molecular typing, and determined their susceptibility to antiseptics. Patient tolerance of the catheter was monitored. RESULTS Patients with the 2 types of catheters had similar demographic features, clinical interventions, laboratory values, and risk factors for infection. Antiseptic catheters were less likely to be colonized at the time of removal compared with control catheters (13.3 vs. 24.1 colonized catheters per 1000 catheter-days; P < 0.01). The center-stratified Cox regression hazard ratio for colonization controlling for sampling design and potentially confounding variables was 0.45 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.78). The rate of definitive catheter-related bloodstream infection was 1.24 per 1000 catheter-days (CI, 0.26 to 3.62 per 1000 catheter-days) for the control group versus 0.42 per 1000 catheter-days (CI, 0.01 to 2.34 per 1000 catheter-days) for the antiseptic catheter group (P = 0.6). Coagulase-negative staphylococci and other gram-positive organisms were the most frequent microbes to colonize catheters. Noninfectious adverse events were similar in both groups. Antiseptic susceptibility was similar for microbes recovered from either group. LIMITATIONS The antiseptic catheter was not compared with an antibiotic-coated catheter, and no conclusion can be made regarding its effect on bloodstream infection. CONCLUSIONS The second-generation chlorhexidine-silver sulfadiazine catheter is well tolerated. Antiseptic coating appears to reduce microbial colonization of the catheter compared with an uncoated catheter.

[1]  W. Peetermans,et al.  Catheter-tip colonization as a surrogate end point in clinical studies on catheter-related bloodstream infection: how strong is the evidence? , 2002, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[2]  Sanjay Saint,et al.  Chlorhexidine compared with povidone-iodine solution for vascular catheter-site care: a meta-analysis. , 2002, Annals of internal medicine.

[3]  R. D. McCormick,et al.  Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter–Related Infections , 2002, Infection Control &#x0026; Hospital Epidemiology.

[4]  D. Maki,et al.  The promise of novel technology for the prevention of intravascular device-related bloodstream infection. II. Long-term devices. , 2002, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[5]  D. Maki,et al.  The promise of novel technology for the prevention of intravascular device-related bloodstream infection. I. Pathogenesis and short-term devices. , 2002, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[6]  F. Götz Staphylococcus and biofilms , 2002, Molecular microbiology.

[7]  S. Tambe,et al.  In vitro evaluation of the risk of developing bacterial resistance to antiseptics and antibiotics used in medical devices. , 2001, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[8]  R. D'Agostino,et al.  Prolonged Antimicrobial Activity of a Catheter Containing Chlorhexidine-Silver Sulfadiazine Extends Protection against Catheter Infections In Vivo , 2001, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[9]  R Consunji,et al.  Increased resource use associated with catheter-related bloodstream infection in the surgical intensive care unit. , 2001, Archives of surgery.

[10]  J. Rello,et al.  Evaluation of outcome of intravenous catheter-related infections in critically ill patients. , 2000, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[11]  L. Mermel,et al.  Prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. , 1994, Annals of internal medicine.

[12]  ohn,et al.  A COMPARISON OF TWO ANTIMICROBIAL-IMPREGNATED CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETERS , 2000 .

[13]  S. Saint,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of antiseptic-impregnated central venous catheters for the prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection. , 1999, JAMA.

[14]  O. Wenker,et al.  A comparison of two antimicrobial-impregnated central venous catheters. Catheter Study Group. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  B. Burlington Potential hypersensitivity reactions to chlorhexidine-impregnated medical devices. , 1998, Ostomy/wound management.

[16]  L. Mermel,et al.  Prevention of Central Venous Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection by Use of an Antiseptic-Impregnated Catheter , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[17]  A. Gabrielli,et al.  Central venous catheters coated with minocycline and rifampin for the prevention of catheter-related colonization and bloodstream infections. A randomized, double-blind trial. The Texas Medical Center Catheter Study Group. , 1997, Annals of internal medicine.

[18]  D Heiselman,et al.  Nosocomial bloodstream infections in the critically ill. , 1994, JAMA.

[19]  M. Rupp,et al.  Coagulase-negative staphylococci: pathogens associated with medical progress. , 1994, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[20]  Didier Pittet,et al.  Nosocomial bloodstream infection in critically ill patients. Excess length of stay, extra costs, and attributable mortality. , 1994, JAMA.

[21]  G. Bodey,et al.  Prevention of Central Venous Catheter-Related Infections by Using Maximal Sterile Barrier Precautions During Insertion , 1994, Infection Control &#x0026; Hospital Epidemiology.

[22]  Anusha,et al.  Three-year experience with sonicated vascular catheter cultures in a clinical microbiology laboratory , 1990, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[23]  C. Gennings,et al.  Prospective study of catheter replacement and other risk factors for infection of hyperalimentation catheters. , 1986, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[24]  D. Maki,et al.  A semiquantitative culture method for identifying intravenous-catheter-related infection. , 1977, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  M. Leduc Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation , 1969 .