0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Review |

Efficacy of Antiseptic-Impregnated Central Venous Catheters in Preventing Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection: A Meta-analysis

David L. Veenstra, PharmD, PhD; Sanjay Saint, MD, MPH; Somnath Saha, MD, MPH; Thomas Lumley, PhD; Sean D. Sullivan, PhD
JAMA. 1999;281(3):261-267. doi:10.1001/jama.281.3.261.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Context Central venous catheters impregnated with chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine have recently been introduced for the prevention of catheter-related infections. However, there remains some uncertainty regarding the efficacy of these catheters because of conflicting reports in the literature.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of chlorhexidine–silver sulfadiazine–impregnated central venous catheters in the prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection.

Data Sources Studies identified from a computerized search of the MEDLINE database from January 1966 to January 1998, reference lists of identified articles, and queries of principal investigators and the catheter manufacturer.

Study Selection Randomized trials comparing chlorhexidine–silver sulfadiazine–impregnated central venous catheters with nonimpregnated catheters were included. The outcomes assessed were catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection confirmed by catheter culture.

Data Extraction Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria for catheter colonization and included a total of 2611 catheters. Eleven studies with a total of 2603 catheters met the inclusion criteria for catheter-related bloodstream infection. Most patients in these studies were from groups considered to be at high risk for catheter-related infections. Summary statistics were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel methods under a fixed-effects model.

Data Synthesis The summary odds ratio for catheter colonization was 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.54; P<.001), indicating a significant decrease in catheter colonization associated with impregnated catheters. The studies examining the outcome of primary interest, catheter-related bloodstream infection, had a summary odds ratio of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.37-0.84; P=.005).

Conclusions Central venous catheters impregnated with a combination of chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine appear to be effective in reducing the incidence of both catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection in patients at high risk for catheter-related infections.

Figures in this Article

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Figures

Figure 1. Analysis of Catheter Colonization in Trials Comparing Chlorhexidine–Silver Sulfadiazine–Impregnated Central Venous Catheters With Nonimpregnated Catheters
Graphic Jump Location
The diamond indicates summary odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Studies are ordered by increasing mean duration of catheterization in the treatment group. The size of the squares is inversely proportional to the variance of the studies.
Figure 2. Analysis of Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection in Trials Comparing Chlorhexidine–Silver Sulfadiazine–Impregnated Central Venous Catheters With Nonimpregnated Catheters
Graphic Jump Location
The diamond indicates summary odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Studies are ordered by increasing mean duration of catheterization in the treatment group. The size of the squares is inversely proportional to the variance of the studies.

Tables

References

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

3,196 Views
286 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
×
brightcove.createExperiences();