Does systemic antibiotic prophylaxis prior to the placement of totally implantable venous access devices reduce early infection? A retrospective study of 1,485 cases at a large academic institution

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-99
Author(s):  
Ankur Choksi ◽  
Karen Finnegan ◽  
Vahid Etezadi
2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-116
Author(s):  
Yuki Imaoka ◽  
Fumito Kuranishi ◽  
Yoshiteru Ogawa

Background/Aims: The need for totally implantable central venous access devices (TICVADs) has increased with increased opportunities in the use of chemotherapy and parenteral nutrition. This study aimed to determine the outcomes of TICVAD implantation and use in patients aged ≥85 years. Methods: Between January 2010 and August 2016, 117 patients underwent TICVAD implantation and their records were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Participants were divided into 2 groups (plus-85 and sub-85 groups). Fifty-five patients (47.0%) had solid organ cancer alone; 35 patients (29.9%) had cerebrovascular or cranial nerve disease. The average follow-up period was 201 (2–1,620) days. Major complications were identified in 6 (14.6%) plus-85 patients and 11 (14.5%) sub-85 patients (p = 0.9813). Catheter-related infections developed in 3 plus-85 (7.3%) and 4 sub-85 patients (5.3%; p = 0.6549). There were no significant group differences in hematoma, pneumothorax, occlusion, and removal rates. In plus-85 patients examined just before surgery and a month after surgery, increased rates of serum albumin and Onodera’s prognostic nutritional index were observed in 48% (14/39) and 41% (12/39), respectively. Conclusions: The use of TICVADs in the plus-85 group resulted in effective outcomes. The results of this retrospective study support the wider use of TICVADs in patients aged ≥85 years.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. e0223063 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Csenkey ◽  
Gergo Jozsa ◽  
Noemi Gede ◽  
Eszter Pakai ◽  
Benedek Tinusz ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 122 (5) ◽  
pp. 1120-1126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rory K. J. Murphy ◽  
Betty Liu ◽  
Abhinav Srinath ◽  
Matthew R. Reynolds ◽  
Jingxia Liu ◽  
...  

OBJECT External ventricular drains (EVDs) are commonly used for CSF diversion but pose a risk of ventriculitis, with rates varying in frequency from 2% to 45%. Results of studies examining the utility of prolonged systemic antibiotic therapy for the prevention of EVD-related infection have been contradictory, and no study to date has examined whether this approach confers additional benefit in preventing ventriculitis when used in conjunction with antibiotic-coated EVDs (ac-EVDs). METHODS A prospective performance analysis was conducted over 4 years to examine the impact of discontinuing systemic antibiotic prophylaxis after insertion of an ac-EVD on rates of catheter-related ventriculitis. Ventriculitis and other nosocomial infections were ascertained by a qualified infection disease nurse using definitions based on published standards from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, comparing the period when patients received systemic antibiotic therapy for the duration of EVD treatment (Period 1) compared with only for the peri-insertion period (Period 2). Costs were analyzed and compared across the 2 time periods. RESULTS Over the 4-year study period, 866 patients were treated with ac-EVDs for a total of 7016 catheter days. There were 8 cases of ventriculitis, for an overall incidence of 0.92%. Rates of ventriculitis did not differ significantly between Period 1 and Period 2 (1.1% vs 0.4%, p = 0.22). The rate of nosocomial infections, however, was significantly higher in Period 1 (2.0% vs 0.0% in Period 2, p = 0.026). Cost savings of $162,516 were realized in Period 2 due to decreased drug costs and savings associated with the reduction in nosocomial infections. CONCLUSIONS Prolonged systemic antibiotic therapy following placement of ac-EVDs does not seem to reduce the incidence of catheter-related ventriculitis and was associated with a higher rate of nosocomial infections and increased cost.


1984 ◽  
Vol 147 (6) ◽  
pp. 753-756 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas M. Bergamini ◽  
Peter M. Lamont ◽  
William G. Cheadle ◽  
Hiram C. Polk

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 4534-4534
Author(s):  
Shun-ichi Kimura ◽  
Hiroshi Nakano ◽  
Tomotaka Ugai ◽  
Hidenori Wada ◽  
Ryoko Yamasaki ◽  
...  

Objectives Fever during neutropenia occurs in > 90% and 80% of allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients, respectively. Current guidelines recommend the prophylaxis with fluoroquinolones (FQs) in HSCT patients. Although there is evidence that antibiotic prophylaxis improve clinical outcome in patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, prophylactic antibiotic therapy has not been thoroughly evaluated in HSCT recipients. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in HSCT recipients on mortality, incidence of infection and related adverse events. Data sources We identified reports that were not restricted to those in English and not restricted to published trials through PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and references of identified studies. Review Methods We included prospective, randomized studies on systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in HSCT recipients. The outcome measures included the all-cause mortality, infection-related mortality, febrile episodes, incidence of clinically or microbiologically documented infection, bacteremia, or related adverse events. The summarized odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using the Mantel–Haenszel method and the DerSimonian–Laird method. Results Seventeen trials with 1453 patients (842 autologous and 407 allogeneic HSCT recipients) were included. The percentage of autologous and allogeneic HSCT recipients was not specified in 2 trials. Systemic antibiotic prophylaxis was compared with placebo or no prophylaxis in 10 trials and with non-absorbable antibiotic in 2 trials, respectively. Systemic antibiotics other than FQs were evaluated in five out of these 12 trials. Four trials evaluated the effect of addition of antibiotics for gram positive bacteria to FQs. Remaining 1 trial compared the two different systemic antibiotic regimens, FQs versus trimethoprim sulfamethoxazole. As a result, systemic antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the incidence of febrile episodes (OR 0.16; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 0.09-0.30), clinically or microbiologically documented infection (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.30-0.57) and bacteremia (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.26-0.53) without the significant effect on all-cause mortality or infection-related mortality (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.48-1.66, OR 1.37; 95% CI 0.50-3.76, respectively). Impact of prophylaxis with FQs on mortality was inconclusive because of small number of clinical trials evaluated. Adverse events increased in patients with systemic antibiotic prophylaxis compared to controls (OR 3.32; 95% CI 1.45-7.63). In meta-regression, percentage of allogeneic HSCT recipients was not associated with each outcome measure. With regard to the comparison between different prophylactic regimens, addition of antibiotics for gram positive bacteria to FQs decreased the incidence of bacteremia (OR 0.44; 0.24-0.80) without significant effects on all-cause mortality, infection related death and febrile episodes. There was not significant, but consistent decrease in clinically or microbiologically documented infection (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.30-1.01). There was significant increase of adverse events in patients receiving addition of antibiotics for gram positive bacteria to FQs (OR 6.65; 95% CI 2.15-20.54). Conclusions Systemic antibiotic prophylaxis successfully reduced the incidence of infection in HSCT recipients. However, there was no significant impact on mortality. Impact of prophylaxis with FQs on mortality in HSCT recipients was inconclusive because of small number of trials evaluated. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2007 ◽  
Vol 102 ◽  
pp. S448-S449
Author(s):  
Abhishek Choudhary ◽  
Matthew L. Bechtold ◽  
Mohamed O. Othman ◽  
Srinivas R. Puli ◽  
John B. Marshall ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document