| Literature DB >> 33023624 |
Hye Ju Yeo1, Dohyung Kim2, Mihyang Ha3, Hyung Gon Je2, Jeong Soo Kim4, Woo Hyun Cho5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the prevention of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) catheter-related infection is crucial, scientific evidence regarding best practices are still lacking.Entities:
Keywords: Catheter; Chlorhexidine disinfection; ECMO; Infection; Mortality
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33023624 PMCID: PMC7538059 DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-03310-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Crit Care ISSN: 1364-8535 Impact factor: 9.097
Fig. 1Patient enrollment diagram
Baseline characteristics of patients
| Variables | Control ( | Intervention ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 56 (58.3) | 67 (69.8) | 0.098 | |
| 56.7 ± 13.4 | 59.4 ± 15.2 | 0.182 | |
| 22.6 ± 4.3 | 23.3 ± 4.5 | 0.323 | |
| 2.0 ± 1.6 | 2.5 ± 1.7 | 0.043 | |
| 19 (19.8) | 20 (20.8) | 0.858 | |
| 11 (11.5) | 4 (4.2) | 0.060 | |
| 11.3 ± 3.7 | 10.3 ± 3.7 | 0.059 | |
| 20.2 ± 7.5 | 19.3 ± 6.6 | 0.377 | |
| 82 (85.4) | 76 (79.2) | 0.257 | |
| 0.978 | |||
| | 17 (17.7) | 18 (18.8) | |
| | 46 (47.9) | 46 (47.9) | |
| | 33 (34.4) | 32 (33.3) | |
| 90 (93.8) | 90 (93.8) | 1.000 | |
| 0.426 | |||
| | 36 (37.5) | 29 (30.2) | |
| | 47 (49.0) | 56 (58.3) | |
| | 13 (13.5) | 11 (11.5) | |
| 0.147 | |||
| | 48 (50.0) | 58 (60.4) | |
| | 48 (50.0) | 38 (39.6) | |
| 0.342 | |||
| | 46 (47.9) | 56 (58.3) | |
| | 48 (50.0) | 38 (39.6) | |
| | 2 (2.1) | 2 (2.1) | |
| 8.9 ± 9.2 | 9.2 ± 10.0 | 0.822 | |
| a | 17 (17.7) | 16 (16.7) | 0.848 |
| 51 (53.1) | 33 (34.4) | 0.009 | |
| 9.7 ± 12.5 | 6.0 ± 5.4 | 0.108 | |
| 9 (9.4) | 17 (17.7) | 0.092 | |
| 10 (10.4) | 14 (14.6) | 0.383 |
Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or n (%)
BMI body mass index, CCI Charlson comorbidity index, SOFA Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, ICU intensive care units, ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, ECPR extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, BSI blood stream infection, VV veno-venous, VA veno-arterial, FV femoral vein, JV jugular vein, FA femoral artery, RRT renal replacement therapy
aLong term was defined as more than 2 weeks
Comparison of infection incidence by intervention
| Control ( | Intervention ( | Difference (95% CI) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Events | Rate | Events | Rate | |||
| 10 | 11.7 | 2 | 2.3 | 9.4 (1.5–17.3) | 0.019 | |
| 9 | 10.5 | 2 | 2.3 | 8.3 (0.7–15.8) | 0.032 | |
| 12 | 14.0 | 1 | 1.1 | 12.9 (4.7–21.1) | 0.002 | |
| 18 | 21.1 | 7 | 7.9 | 13.1 (1.8–24.5) | 0.023 | |
ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, BSI blood stream infection, CRBSI catheter-related bloodstream infection
aRates are expressed per 1000 ECMO days. There were 855 ECMO days in the control group and 885 ECMO days in the intervention group
ECMO complications and clinical outcomes
| Variables | Control ( | Intervention ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 22 (22.9) | 25 (26.0) | 0.615 |
| | 3 (3.1) | 7 (7.3) | 0.194 |
| 81 (84.4) | 84 (87.5) | 0.533 | |
| 18.4 ± 21.5 | 24.3 ± 29.0 | 0.114 | |
| 23.4 ± 22.2 | 27.3 ± 27.8 | 0.281 | |
| 50.2 ± 48.3 | 58.8 ± 46.2 | 0.208 | |
| 37 (38.5) | 21 (21.9) | 0.012 | |
| 40 (41.7) | 23 (24) | 0.009 | |
| 17 (17.7) | 6 (6.3) | 0.014 | |
Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or n (%)
ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, ICU intensive care unit
Risk factors of BSI during ECMO support
| Variable | Univariate regression | Multivariate regression | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | |||
| a | 3.88 (1.15–13.09) | 0.029 | ||
| 0.18 (0.04–0.86) | 0.031 | 0.16 (0.03–0.76) | 0.021 | |
| 4.20 (1.10–16.04) | 0.036 | |||
| 4.00 (1.10–14.49) | 0.035 | 5.13 (1.32–20.00) | 0.019 | |
OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, RRT renal replacement therapy
aLong term was defined as more than 2 weeks
Fig. 2Occurrence of bloodstream infection by intervention. The intervention was significantly related to lower bloodstream infection rate (χ2 = 5.70, p = 0.017)