COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

A prospective, randomized trial of rifampicin-minocycline-coated and silver-platinum-carbon-impregnated central venous catheters

David Fraenkel, Claire Rickard, Peter Thomas, Joan Faoagali, Narelle George, Robert Ware
Critical Care Medicine 2006, 34 (3): 668-75
16505651

OBJECTIVE: Central venous catheters are the predominant cause of nosocomial bacteremia; however, the effectiveness of different antimicrobial central venous catheters remains uncertain. We compared the infection rate of silver-platinum-carbon (SPC)-impregnated catheters with rifampicin-minocycline (RM)-coated catheters.

DESIGN: A large, single-center, prospective randomized study.

SETTING: Twenty-two-bed adult general intensive care unit in a large tertiary metropolitan hospital in Brisbane, Australia (2000-2001).

PATIENTS: Consecutive series of all central venous catheterizations in intensive care unit patients.

INTERVENTIONS: Randomization, concealment, and blinding were carefully performed. Catheter insertion and care were performed according to published guidelines. Blood cultures were taken at central venous catheter removal, and catheter-tip cultures were performed by both roll-plate and sonication techniques. Pulsed field gel electrophoresis was used to establish shared clonal origin for matched isolates.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Central venous catheter colonization and catheter-related bloodstream infection were determined with a blinded technique using the evaluation of the extensive microbiological and clinical data collected and a rigorous classification system. Six hundred forty-six central venous catheters (RM 319, SPC 327) were inserted, and 574 (89%) were microbiologically evaluable. Colonization rates were lower for the RM catheters than SPC catheters (25 of 280, 8.9%; 43 of 294, 14.6%; p=.039). A Kaplan-Meier analysis that included catheter time in situ did not quite achieve statistical significance (p=.055). Catheter-related bloodstream infection was infrequent for both catheter-types (RM 4, 1.4%; SPC 5, 1.7%).

CONCLUSIONS: The SPC catheter is a clinically effective antimicrobial catheter; however, the RM catheter had a lower colonization rate. Both catheter types had low rates of catheter-related bloodstream infection. These results indicate that future studies will require similar rigorous methodology and thousands of central venous catheters to demonstrate differences in catheter-related bloodstream infection rates.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
16505651
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"