We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Tunneling short-term central venous catheters to prevent catheter-related infection: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.
Critical Care Medicine 1998 August
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of tunneling short-term central venous catheters to prevent catheter-related infections.
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, citation review of relevant primary and review articles, personal files, and contact with expert informants.
STUDY SELECTION: From a pool of 225 randomized, controlled trials of venous and arterial catheter management, we identified 12 relevant trials and included seven of these trials in the analysis.
DATA EXTRACTION: In duplicate, independently, we abstracted data on the population, intervention, outcomes, and methodologic quality.
DATA SYNTHESIS: Tunneling decreased bacterial colonization of the catheter by 39% (relative risk of 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.39 to 0.95) and decreased catheter-related sepsis with bacteriologic confirmation by 44% (relative risk of 0.56; 95% CI of 0.31 to 1) in comparison with standard placement. The majority of the benefit in the decreased rate of catheter-sepsis came from one trial at the internal jugular site (relative risk of 0.30, 95% CI of 0.10 to 0.89) and the reduction in risk was not significant when the data from five subclavian catheter trials were pooled (relative risk of 0.71, 95% CI of 0.36 to 1.43). Tunneling was not associated with increased risk of mechanical complications from placement or technical difficulties during placement. However, this outcome was not rigorously evaluated.
CONCLUSIONS: Tunneling decreases central venous catheter-related infections. However, current evidence does not support routine tunneling until its efficacy is evaluated at different placement sites and relative to other interventions.
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, citation review of relevant primary and review articles, personal files, and contact with expert informants.
STUDY SELECTION: From a pool of 225 randomized, controlled trials of venous and arterial catheter management, we identified 12 relevant trials and included seven of these trials in the analysis.
DATA EXTRACTION: In duplicate, independently, we abstracted data on the population, intervention, outcomes, and methodologic quality.
DATA SYNTHESIS: Tunneling decreased bacterial colonization of the catheter by 39% (relative risk of 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.39 to 0.95) and decreased catheter-related sepsis with bacteriologic confirmation by 44% (relative risk of 0.56; 95% CI of 0.31 to 1) in comparison with standard placement. The majority of the benefit in the decreased rate of catheter-sepsis came from one trial at the internal jugular site (relative risk of 0.30, 95% CI of 0.10 to 0.89) and the reduction in risk was not significant when the data from five subclavian catheter trials were pooled (relative risk of 0.71, 95% CI of 0.36 to 1.43). Tunneling was not associated with increased risk of mechanical complications from placement or technical difficulties during placement. However, this outcome was not rigorously evaluated.
CONCLUSIONS: Tunneling decreases central venous catheter-related infections. However, current evidence does not support routine tunneling until its efficacy is evaluated at different placement sites and relative to other interventions.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app