scholarly journals Prevalence of the Use of Central Venous Access Devices Within and Outside of the Intensive Care Unit: Results of a Survey Among Hospitals in the Prevention Epicenter Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

2003 ◽  
Vol 24 (12) ◽  
pp. 942-945 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Climo ◽  
Dan Diekema ◽  
David K. Warren ◽  
Loreen A. Herwaldt ◽  
Trish M. Perl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Teaching Hospitals ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Prevalence Survey ◽  
Icu Patients ◽  
Medical Centers ◽  
Control And Prevention

AbstractObjective:To determine the prevalence of central venous catheter (CVC) use among patients both within and outside the ICU setting.Design:A 1-day prevalence survey of CVC use among adult inpatients at six medical centers participating in the Prevention Epicenter Program of the CDC. Using a standardized form, observers at each Epicenter performed a hospital-wide survey, collecting data on CVC use.Setting:Inpatient wards and ICUs of six large urban teaching hospitals.Results:At the six medical centers, 2,459 patients were surveyed; 29% had CVCs. Among the hospitals, from 43% to 80% (mean, 59.3%) of ICU patients and from 7% to 39% (mean, 23.7%) of non-ICU patients had CVCs. Despite the lower rate of CVC use on non-ICU wards, the actual number of CVCs outside the ICUs exceeded that of the ICUs. Most catheters were inserted in the subclavian (55%) or jugular (22%) site, with femoral (6%) and peripheral (15%) sites less commonly used. The jugular (33.0% vs 16.6%; P < .001) and femoral (13.8% vs 2.7%; P < .001) sites were more frequently used in ICU patients, whereas peripherally inserted (19.9% vs 5.9%; P < .001) and subclavian (60.7% vs 47.3%; P < .001) catheters were more commonly used in non-ICU patients.Conclusions:Current surveillance and infection control efforts to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with bloodstream infections concentrate on the high-risk ICU patients with CVCs. Our survey demonstrated that two-thirds of identified CVCs were not in ICU patients and suggests that more efforts should be directed to patients with CVCs who are outside the ICU.

scholarly journals PROVISION OF CENTRAL VENOUS ACCESS DURING ALLOGENEIC HAEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL TRANSPLANTATION

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 396-411
Author(s):  
M. V. Spirin ◽  
G. M. Galstyan ◽  
M. Yu. Drokov ◽  
L. A. Kuzmina ◽  
G. A. Klyasova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Haematopoietic Stem Cell ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Post Transplant ◽  
Antibacterial Coating ◽  
Mechanical Complications

Introduction. The transplantation of allogeneic haematopoietic stem cells (allo-HSCT) is impossible without a central venous catheter (CVC).Aim. To determine an optimal approach to providing venous access during allo-HSCT.Materials and methods. This prospective, non-randomised, single-centre study included 146 patients (70 men and 76 women, median age 37 years) who underwent the fi rst allo-HSCT. Prior to conditioning, one of the following CVCs was placed: Hickman or Leonard tunnelled double-lumen silicone catheters (BardAccessSystem); polyurethane non-tunnelled CVCs without (Certofi x Duo, B. Braun) or with an antibacterial coating (Certofi x Protect Duo, B. Braun). The following complications were recorded: early complications, mechanical complications, catheter-associated thrombosis (CAT), catheterrelated bloodstream infections (CRBSI), as well as catheter exit-site and tunnel infections.Results. A total of 320 CVCs were placed (146 prior to allo-HSCT and 174 in the post-transplant period); 259 of the CVCs were non-tunnelled and 61 were tunnelled. Non-tunnelled CVCs were used for 1–123 days (median 22 days), whereas tunnelled CVCs were implanted for 9–621 days (median 146 days). The use of non-tunnelled CVCs was associated with 2.7 % (1.0/1000 catheter days) of mechanical complications and 9 % of CAT (1.4 / 1000 catheter days). The use of tunnelled CVCs was associated with the following complications: accidental removal — 1 (1.6 %), catheter rupture — 4 (6.5 %), CAT — 5 (8.2 %) patients (0.3 / 1000 catheter days); 18 (29.5 %) patients exhibited catheter obstruction, with CVC function being restored in 14 (77.7 %) patients, whereas in 4 (22.3 %) patients the CVC was removed. The incidence of CRBSI associated with non-tunnelled and tunnelled CVCs was 4.4 and 1.5 per 1000 catheter days, respectively. The study revealed no significant differences in the probability of developing CRBSI between non-tunnelled CVCs with and without antibacterial coating (p = 0.298), as well as between non-tunnelled and tunnelled CVCs in the fi rst 28 days after the catheter placement (p = 0.424). The risk of developing CRBSI when using tunnelled CVCs increased after 150 days of use.Conclusion. Allo-HSCT can be performed using any CVC type. Our study revealed no advantages in employing nontunnelled CVCs with an antibacterial coating compared to those having no coating. Tunnelled CVCs (as opposed to nontunnelled ones) provide the opportunity to employ a single catheter throughout the entire transplantation and post-transplant period. It should be noted that tunnelled CVCs should not be used for more than 150 days, since prolonged use of such CVCs significantly increases the risk of infection.Conflict of interest: the authors declare no conflict of interest.Financial disclosure: the study had no sponsorship.

Prevention of Infection in Adults Receiving Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment via Indwelling Central Venous Access Devices

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-49
Author(s):  
Basant K. Puri ◽  
Anne Derham ◽  
Jean A. Monro
Keyword(s):  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Antibiotic Treatment ◽  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Host Cells ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Intravenous Antibiotic ◽  
Venous Access Devices

Background: The use of indwelling Central Venous Access Devices (CVADs) is associated with the development of bloodstream infections. When CVADs are used to administer systemic antibiotics, particularly second- or higher-generation cephalosporins, there is a particular risk of developing Clostridium difficile infection. The overall bloodstream infection rate is estimated to be around 1.74 per 1000 Central Venous Catheter (CVC)-days. Objective: We hypothesised that daily oral administration of the anion-binding resin colestyramine (cholestyramine) would help prevent infections in those receiving intravenous antibiotic treatment via CVADs. Method: A small case series is described of adult patients who received regular intravenous antibiotic treatment (ceftriaxone, daptomycin or vancomycin) for up to 40 weeks via indwelling CVADs; this represented a total of 357 CVC-days. In addition to following well-established strategies to prevent C. difficile infection, during the course of the intravenous antibiotic treatment the patients also received daily oral supplementation with 4 g colestyramine. Results: There were no untoward infectious events. In particular, none of the patients developed any symptoms or signs of C. difficile infection, whereas approximately one case of a bloodstream infection would have been expected. Conclusion: It is suggested that oral colestyramine supplementation may help prevent such infection through its ability to bind C. difficile toxin A (TcdA) and C. difficile toxin B (TcdB); these toxins are able to gain entry into host cells through receptor-mediated endocytosis, while anti-toxin antibody responses to TcdA and TcdB have been shown to induce protection against C. difficile infection sequelae.

Hybrid angioplasty-catheter placement procedure performed in a hemodialysis patient with central venous obstruction disease. Presentation of a case

2020 ◽  
pp. 112972982098318
Author(s):  
Nikolaos Ptohis ◽  
Panagiotis G Theodoridis ◽  
Ioannis Raftopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Major Complication ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Transluminal Angioplasty ◽  
Catheter Placement ◽  
Venous Disease ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Brachiocephalic Trunk

Obstruction or occlusion of the central veins (Central venous disease, CVD) represents a major complication in hemodialysis patients (HD) limiting central venous access available for a central venous catheter placement. Endovascular treatment with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) is the first therapeutic option to restore patency and gain access. This case presents our initial experience of a HD patient with CVD treated with a combination therapy of a balloon PTA to the left brachiocephalic trunk, through the right hepatic vein and standard catheter placement technique to the previously occluded junction of the left internal jugular vein to the left subclavian vein.

scholarly journals Central Venous Catheter induced Atrial Fibrillation-A Case Report

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 200-204
Author(s):  
Masud Ahmed ◽  
Azizun Nessa ◽  
Md Al Amin Salek
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Central Venous Catheter ◽  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Cardiac Complications ◽  
Haemodynamic Instability ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Common Procedure ◽  
Dc Cardioversion

Though a common procedure, central venous access is related to morbidity and mortality of patients. Common cardiac complications caused by central venous catheters include premature atrial and ventricular contractions. But development of atrial fibrillation with haemodynamic instability is quite rare. We are reporting a patient who developed atrial fibrillation with hypotension while inserting central venous catheter through right subclavian vein by landmark technique. Patient was managed with DC cardioversion. Careful insertion of central venous catheter & prompt management of its complication is crucial to avoid catastrophe. J Bangladesh Coll Phys Surg 2021; 39(3): 200-204

Central Venous Catheter Salvage in Ambulatory Central Line–Associated Bloodstream Infections

PEDIATRICS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J.H. Ford ◽  
David G. Bundy ◽  
Suzette Oyeku ◽  
Moonseong Heo ◽  
Lisa Saiman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Type Number ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Medical Centers ◽  
Associated Risk Factors

BACKGROUND Guidelines for treatment of central line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) recommend removing central venous catheters (CVCs) in many cases. Clinicians must balance these recommendations with the difficulty of obtaining alternate access and subjecting patients to additional procedures. In this study, we evaluated CVC salvage in pediatric patients with ambulatory CLABSI and associated risk factors for treatment failure. METHODS This study was a secondary analysis of 466 ambulatory CLABSIs in patients &lt;22 years old who presented to 5 pediatric medical centers from 2010 to 2015. We defined attempted CVC salvage as a CVC left in place ≥3 days after a positive blood culture result. Salvage failure was removal of the CVC ≥3 days after CLABSI. Successful salvage was treatment of CLABSI without removal of the CVC. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to test associations between risk factors and attempted and successful salvage. RESULTS A total of 460 ambulatory CLABSIs were included in our analysis. CVC salvage was attempted in 379 (82.3%) cases. Underlying diagnosis, CVC type, number of lumens, and absence of candidemia were associated with attempted salvage. Salvage was successful in 287 (75.7%) attempted cases. Underlying diagnosis, CVC type, number of lumens, and absence of candidemia were associated with successful salvage. In patients with malignancy, neutropenia within 30 days before CLABSI was significantly associated with both attempted salvage and successful salvage. CONCLUSIONS CVC salvage was often attempted and was frequently successful in ambulatory pediatric patients presenting with CLABSI.

scholarly journals Linezolid lock prophylaxis of central venous catheter infection

2008 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 534-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jérôme Patrick Fennell ◽  
Martin O'Donohoe ◽  
Martin Cormican ◽  
Maureen Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Central Venous Catheter ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Blood Stream Infection ◽  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Blood Stream ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Central Venous Catheter Infection ◽  
The Impact

Central venous catheter (CVC)-related infections are a major problem for patients requiring long-term venous access and may result in frequent hospital admissions and difficulties in maintaining central venous access. CVC-related blood stream infections are associated with increased duration of inpatient stay and cost approximately \#8364;13 585 per patient [Blot, S. I., Depuydt, P., Annemans, L., Benoit, D., Hoste, E., De Waele, J. J., Decruyenaere, J., Vogelaers, D., Colardyn, F. & Vandewoude, K. H. (2005). Clin Infect Dis 41, 1591–1598]. Antimicrobial lock therapy may prevent CVC-related blood stream infection, preserve central venous access and reduce hospital admissions. In this paper, the impact of linezolid lock prophylaxis in a patient with short bowel syndrome is described.

Practical procedures

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Thomas ◽  
Tanya Monaghan ◽  
Prarthana Thiagarajan
Keyword(s):  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Chest Drain ◽  
Arterial Line ◽  
Tube Insertion ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Urethral Catheterization ◽  
Arterial Blood Gas ◽  
Arterial Blood

Using this chapterInfiltrating anaesthetic agentsHand hygieneConsentAseptic techniqueSubcutaneous and intramuscular injectionsIntravenous injectionsVenepunctureSampling from a central venous catheterArterial blood gas (ABG) samplingPeripheral venous cannulationFemoral venous catheter insertionCentral venous access: internal jugular veinCentral venous access: subclavian veinCentral venous access: ultrasound guidanceIntravenous infusionsArterial line insertionFine needle aspiration (FNA)Lumbar punctureMale urethral catheterizationFemale urethral catheterizationBasic airway managementOxygen administrationPeak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) measurementInhaler techniqueNon-invasive ventilationPleural fluid aspirationPneumothorax aspirationChest drain insertion (Seldinger)Recording a 12-lead ECGCarotid sinus massageVagal manoeuvresTemporary external pacingDC cardioversionPericardiocentesisNasogastric tube insertionAscitic fluid sampling (ascitic tap)Abdominal paracentesis (drainage)Sengstaken–Blakemore tube insertionBasic interrupted suturingCleaning an open woundApplying a backslabManual handling

scholarly journals Superior Vena Cava Duplication: The Red Herring of Central Line Placement

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Karin Gunther ◽  
Carmen Lam ◽  
David Siegel
Keyword(s):  
Superior Vena Cava ◽  
Superior Vena ◽  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Venous Catheter ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
The United States ◽  
Central Line ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Central Venous Access Lines

5 million central venous access lines are placed every year in the United States, and it is a common surgical bedside procedure. We present a case of a central venous catheter placement with port for chemotherapy use, during which a duplication of a superior vena cava was discovered on CTA chest after fluoroscopy could not confirm placement of the guidewire. Due to its potential clinical implications, superior vena cava duplication must be recognized when it occurs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document