The Journal of hospital infection
-
Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Effectiveness of different central venous catheters for catheter-related infections: a network meta-analysis.
We aimed to compare the effectiveness of various catheters for prevention of catheter-related infection and to evaluate whether specific catheters are superior to others for reducing catheter-related infections. We identified randomised, controlled trials that compared different types of central venous catheter (CVC), evaluating catheter-related infections in a systematic search of articles published from January 1996 to November 2009 via Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Network meta-analysis with a mixed treatment comparison method using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation was used to combine direct within-trial, between-treatment comparisons with indirect trial evidence. ⋯ For prevention of CVC colonisation, adjusted silver iontophoretic catheters (odds ratio: 0.58; 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.95), chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine catheters (0.49; 0.36-0.64), chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine blue plus catheters (0.37; 0.17-0.69), minocycline-rifampicin catheters (0.28; 0.17-0.43) and miconazole-rifampicin catheters (0.11; 0.02-0.33) were associated with a significantly lower rate of catheter colonisation compared with standard catheters. For prevention of CRBSI, adjusted heparin-bonded catheters (0.20; 0.06-0.44) and minocycline-rifampicin catheters (0.18; 0.08-0.34) were associated with a significantly lower rate of CRBSI with standard catheters. Rifampicin-based impregnated catheters seem to be better for prevention of catheter-related infection compared with the other catheters.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Anti-infective-treated central venous catheters for total parenteral nutrition or chemotherapy: a systematic review.
This systematic review assesses the effect of anti-infective-treated central venous catheters (CVCs) on catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) in patients who received a CVC for total parenteral nutrition (TPN) or chemotherapy. Randomised controlled trials were retrieved from Medline and the Cochrane Library up to 14 October 2007. Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. ⋯ No relationship could be established between the effect of anti-infective-treated CVCs and the underlying risk for CRBSI, although nearly all trials had serious methodological shortcomings. Thus, available scientific evidence to prevent CRBSI by the use of anti-infective-treated CVCs in patients receiving chemotherapy or TPN is not sufficient as a basis to recommend their use. The recommendation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to use antibiotic- or antiseptic-impregnated CVCs, when the risk for CRBSI remains high despite good hygienic practice, should therefore be limited to patients in the intensive care/perioperative setting.
-
Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined the influence of oral chlorhexidine (CHX) in preventing nosocomial lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI). Most have failed to demonstrate a reduction in the incidence of LRTI. The present meta-analysis summarizes the effect of oral CHX on the development of LRTI. ⋯ Further analyses showed that this result applied only to patients ventilated for up to 48h (RR(random): 0.58, CI95: 0.45-0.74; and RR(fixed): 0.56, 95% CI: 0.44-0.72). Oral CHX should be included among preventive measures performed to reduce nosocomial LRTI. Whether it has an impact on the development of LRTI in patients requiring mechanical ventilation for a longer period of time remains unresolved.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Selective decontamination of the digestive tract reduces bacterial bloodstream infection and mortality in critically ill patients. Systematic review of randomized, controlled trials.
A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) was undertaken to evaluate the impact of this procedure on bacterial bloodstream infection and mortality. Data sources were Medline, Embase, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, previous meta-analyses, and conference proceedings, without restriction of language or publication status. RCTs were retrieved that compared oropharyngeal and/or intestinal administration of antibiotics as part of the SDD protocol, with or without a parenteral component, with no treatment or placebo in the controls. ⋯ SDD significantly reduced overall bloodstream infections [odds ratio (OR), 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.59-0.90; P=0.0036], gram-negative bloodstream infections (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.63; P<0.001) and overall mortality (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.94; P=0.0064), without affecting gram-positive bloodstream infections (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.77-1.47). The subgroup analysis showed an even larger impact of SDD using parenteral and enteral antimicrobials on overall bloodstream infections, bloodstream infections due to gram-negative bacteria and overall mortality with ORs of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.46-0.87; P=0.005), 0.30 (95% CI, 0.16-0.56; P<0.001), and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.61-0.91; P=0.0034), respectively. Twenty patients need to be treated with SDD to prevent one gram-negative bloodstream infection and 22 patients to prevent one death.