scholarly journals A case series of anaphylaxis to chlorhexidine-impregnated central venous catheters in cardiac surgical patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter A Baird ◽  
Chris J Cokis

We report a case series of anaphylaxis to chlorhexidine-coated central venous catheters (CVCs) when used in cardiac surgical patients in our institution. Our experience, together with increasing reports of anaphylaxis to chlorhexidine-coated CVCs from other sources indicates that chlorhexidine-coated CVCs are not without additional risk. Attempts to lower rates of catheter-related bloodstream infection has led to the widespread adoption of chlorhexidine-coated CVCs in the perioperative and critical care setting, including for routine cardiac surgery. However, closer scrutiny indicates that there is lack of strong evidence demonstrating a meaningful reduction in rates of sepsis or serious morbidity, especially with CVC dwell times of less than seven days. Given the lack of clear benefit, we recommend non-coated CVCs for routine cardiac surgery, with even consideration for chlorhexidine-coated CVCs when specifically indicated for patients at high risk of CVC infection.

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s258-s258
Author(s):  
Madhuri Tirumandas ◽  
Theresa Madaline ◽  
Gregory David Weston ◽  
Ruchika Jain ◽  
Jamie Figueredo

Background: Although central-line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) in US hospitals have improved in the last decade, ~30,100 CLABSIs occur annually.1,2 Central venous catheters (CVC) carry a high risk of infections and should be limited to appropriate clinical indications.6,7 Montefiore Medical Center, a large, urban, academic medical center in the Bronx, serves a high-risk population with multiple comobidities.8–11 Despite this, the critical care medicine (CCM) team is often consulted to place a CVC when a peripheral intravenous line (PIV) cannot be obtained by nurses or primary providers. We evaluated the volume of CCM consultation requests for avoidable CVCs and related CLABSIs. Methods: Retrospective chart review was performed for patients with CCM consultation requests for CVC placement between July and October 2019. The indication for CVC, type of catheter inserted or recommended, and NHSN data were used to identify CLABSIs. CVCs were considered avoidable if a PIV was used for the stated indication and duration of therapy, with no anatomical contraindications to PIV in nonemergencies, according to the Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters (MAGIC).6Results: Of 229 total CCM consults, 4 (18%) requests were for CVC placement; 21 consultations (9%) were requested for avoidable CVCs. Of 40 CVC requests, 18 (45%) resulted in CVC placement by the CCM team, 4 (10%) were deferred for nonurgent PICC by interventional radiology, and 18 (45%) were deferred in favor of PIV or no IV. Indications for CVC insertion included emergent chemotherapy (n = 8, 44%) and dialysis (n = 3, 16%), vasopressors (n = 3, 16%), antibiotics (n = 2, 11%) and blood transfusion (n = 2, 11%). Of 18 CVCs, 9 (50%) were potentially avoidable: 2 short-term antibiotics and rest for nonemergent indications; 2 blood transfusions, 1 dialysis, 2 chemotherapy and 2 vasopressors. Between July and October 2019, 6 CLABSIs occurred in CVCs placed by the CCM team; in 3 of 6 CLABSI events (50%), the CVC was avoidable. Conclusions: More than half of consultation requests to the CCM team for CVCs are avoidable, and they disproportionately contribute to CLABSI events. Alternatives for intravenous access could potentially avoid 9% of CCM consultations and 50% of CLABSIs in CCM-inserted CVCs on medical-surgical wards.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None


2009 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 698-701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefania Bezzio ◽  
C. Scolfaro ◽  
R. Broglia ◽  
R. Calabrese ◽  
F. Mignone ◽  
...  

This prospective observational study was designed to assess the incidence of, risk factors for, and outcome of catheter-related bloodstream infection in children undergoing cardiac surgery. A staff specifically trained to handle the central venous catheters with proper aseptic techniques and an appropriate patient to medical staff ratio remain the most effective measures to prevent this infection.


2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Basel Al Raiy ◽  
Mohamad G. Fakih ◽  
Nicole Bryan-Nomides ◽  
Debi Hopfner ◽  
Elizabeth Riegel ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 1018-1026 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisca Jane Gomes de Oliveira ◽  
Joselany Afio Caetano ◽  
Viviane Martins da Silva ◽  
Paulo César de Almeida ◽  
Andrea Bezerra Rodrigues ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to evaluate the compliance of the implemented prevention and control practices for central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection, through clinical indicators. An observational study, with a quantitative approach, was conducted. The case series was based on 2064 evaluations, conducted through direct observation and medical records, using a manual for evaluating the quality of cross-infection control practices. The results showed that the indicator for the registrations of the insertion and dwell time of the catheter had the highest overall compliance rate (62.5%). The indicator related to hand hygiene, on the other hand, showed a null overall compliance rate. Strategies must be developed to ensure adherence to the prevention and control practices for central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection and periodic evaluations of working conditions must be implemented, in order to raise compliance rates.


Author(s):  
Maria L. Carrio ◽  
Juan Carlos Lopez-Delgado ◽  
Casimiro Javierre ◽  
Herminia Torrado ◽  
Elisabet Farrero ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-332
Author(s):  
Marcin Michalak ◽  
Łukasz Januszkiewicz ◽  
Franciszek Majstrak ◽  
Monika Gawałko ◽  
Grzegorz Opolski ◽  
...  

Long-term tunneled central venous catheters are widely used in several clinical indications, that is, hemodialysis, chemotherapy, and total parenteral nutrition. However, central venous catheters are associated with a number of complications, including catheter occlusion and sepsis, which may necessitate earlier catheter removal. In most cases manual traction is sufficient to remove the catheter. Nevertheless, in some cases severe adhesions, formed between the catheter and the vessel wall, complicate simple catheter removal. We present four cases of entrapped long-term central venous catheters and describe methods (e.g. endoluminal balloon dilatation and wire snare) performed by experienced cardiologists at high-volume center to remove them. We claim that permanent central venous catheters removal procedures may be unpredictable and hazardous. Therefore, entrapped central venous catheters should be extracted by experienced operators in specialized high-volume centers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document