Leon J Worth1, John F Seymour, Monica A Slavin. 1. Centre for Clinical Research Excellence in Infectious Disease, Victorian Infectious Diseases Service, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, 3052, Australia. leon.worth@petermac.org
Abstract
GOALS: Central venous catheter (CVC)-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI) is a significant complication in hematology patients. A range of CVC devices may be used, and risks for the development of complications are not uniform. The objectives of this study were to determine the natural history and rate of CVC-related complications and risk factors for CR-BSI and to compare device-specific complications in a hematology population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational cohort of patients with hematologic malignancy was prospectively studied following CVC insertion. Participants were reviewed until a CVC-related complication necessitated device removal, completion of therapy, death, or defined end-of-study date. The National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance definition for CR-BSI was used. Overall and device-specific rates of infective and noninfective complications were calculated and potential risk factors were captured. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred six CVCs (75 peripherally inserted central venous catheters [PICCs], 31 nontunneled CVCs) were evaluated in 66 patients, over 2,399 CVC days. Thrombosis occurred in 16 cases (15.1%), exit-site infection in two (1.9%), and CR-BSI in 18 (7.5 per 1,000 CVC days). No significant differences were found when complication rates in PICC and nontunneled devices were compared. An underlying diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia was negatively associated with CR-BSI (odds ratio (OR) 0.14, p = 0.046), and a previous diagnosis of fungal infection was associated with infection (OR 22.82, p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: CR-BSI rates in our hematology population are comparable to prior reports. A low rate of exit-site infection and high proportion of thrombotic complications were observed. No significant differences in thrombotic or infective complications were evident when PICC and nontunneled devices were compared. PICC devices are a practical and safe option for management of hematology patients.
GOALS: Central venous catheter (CVC)-related bloodstream infection (CR-BSI) is a significant complication in hematology patients. A range of CVC devices may be used, and risks for the development of complications are not uniform. The objectives of this study were to determine the natural history and rate of CVC-related complications and risk factors for CR-BSI and to compare device-specific complications in a hematology population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational cohort of patients with hematologic malignancy was prospectively studied following CVC insertion. Participants were reviewed until a CVC-related complication necessitated device removal, completion of therapy, death, or defined end-of-study date. The National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance definition for CR-BSI was used. Overall and device-specific rates of infective and noninfective complications were calculated and potential risk factors were captured. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred six CVCs (75 peripherally inserted central venous catheters [PICCs], 31 nontunneled CVCs) were evaluated in 66 patients, over 2,399 CVC days. Thrombosis occurred in 16 cases (15.1%), exit-site infection in two (1.9%), and CR-BSI in 18 (7.5 per 1,000 CVC days). No significant differences were found when complication rates in PICC and nontunneled devices were compared. An underlying diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia was negatively associated with CR-BSI (odds ratio (OR) 0.14, p = 0.046), and a previous diagnosis of fungal infection was associated with infection (OR 22.82, p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: CR-BSI rates in our hematology population are comparable to prior reports. A low rate of exit-site infection and high proportion of thrombotic complications were observed. No significant differences in thrombotic or infective complications were evident when PICC and nontunneled devices were compared. PICC devices are a practical and safe option for management of hematology patients.
Authors: L A Mermel; B M Farr; R J Sherertz; I I Raad; N O'Grady; J S Harris; D E Craven Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2001-04-03 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: M Dettenkofer; S Wenzler-Röttele; R Babikir; H Bertz; W Ebner; E Meyer; H Rüden; P Gastmeier; F D Daschner Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2005-03-04 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: M Dettenkofer; W Ebner; H Bertz; R Babikir; J Finke; U Frank; H Rüden; F D Daschner Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: G Gonzalez; A M Davidoff; S C Howard; C-H Pui; B N Rao; J L Shenep; A Wozniak; S J Shochat Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2011-12-11 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: G S Patel; K Jain; R Kumar; A H Strickland; L Pellegrini; J Slavotinek; M Eaton; W McLeay; T Price; M Ly; S Ullah; B Koczwara; G Kichenadasse; C S Karapetis Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-09-05 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Natalia Curto-García; Julio García-Suárez; Marta Callejas Chavarria; Juan José Gil Fernández; Yolanda Martín Guerrero; Elena Magro Mazo; Shelly Marcellini Antonio; Luis Miguel Juárez; Isabel Gutierrez; Juan José Arranz; Irene Montalvo; Carmen Elvira; Pilar Domínguez; María Teresa Díaz; Carmen Burgaleta Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-05-03 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Salvatore Giacomo Morano; Roberto Latagliata; Corrado Girmenia; Fulvio Massaro; Paola Berneschi; Alfonso Guerriero; Massimo Giampaoletti; Arianna Sammarco; Giorgia Annechini; Angelo Fama; Alice Di Rocco; Antonio Chistolini; Alessandra Micozzi; Matteo Molica; Walter Barberi; Clara Minotti; Gregorio Antonio Brunetti; Massimo Breccia; Claudio Cartoni; Saveria Capria; Giovanni Rosa; Giuliana Alimena; Robin Foà Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-04-26 Impact factor: 3.603