重大烧伤患者中心静脉导管相关并发症的研究

Itisha Agrawal, Arun Bhatnagar
{"title":"重大烧伤患者中心静脉导管相关并发症的研究","authors":"Itisha Agrawal, Arun Bhatnagar","doi":"10.4103/ijb.ijb_1_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Routinely changing central venous catheters (CVCs) as a prevention strategy of bbloodstreaminfections in burns patients has been controversial due to the paucity of evidence for appropriate timings of line changes. This study aims to ascertain the risk factors associated with central line-associated sepsis and thrombosis and to evaluate the role of heparin lock, routine line changes, and thromboprophylaxis in reducing the risk of complications associated with central venous catheterization. Materials and Methods: A retrospective observational hospital-based study on 50 patients admitted with major burns (involving 40% or more total body surface area [TBSA] in burn intensive care unit/ward at Gandhi Medical College and Associated Hamidia Hospital from May 2021 to June 2022. Nontunneled, triple-lumen central lines were inserted usingthe Seldinger technique preferentially on healthy skin and secured with Tegaderm™ CHG Chlorhexidine Gluconate transparent dressing. The removal of central lines was done sepsis (persistent rise of fever unresponsive to antipyretics or empirical antibiotics) or when distal limb swelling edema) developed. Routine removal of the central line was also done when resuscitation was over and parenteral nutritional supplementation was no longer needed (after 12–15 days) or before shifting from HDU or on discharge. Data collection included: Demographics, co-morbidities, type and cause of burn, %TBSA, route (subclavian, femoral, and jugular line), access (healthy/burned) of line, duration of line in situ, complications (cellulitis, edema, venous thrombosis, and persistent high-grade fever), culture/sensitivity (c/s) reports, duration of hospital stay, heparin prophylaxis, or treatment. The data were processed with Chi-square test. The primary outcome of this observational study was a measure of catheter-related bloodstream infections and symptomatic deep vein thrombosis and their correlation with demographics and various comorbidities. Result: Central line duration and age were identified as independent risk factors for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), with central line duration the most significant predictor (P < 0.05). CLABSI occurred at 12.81 ± 2.967 days' postline insertion. Further research is needed to assess the role of routine line changes (every 12–15 days' postinsertion) in preventing CLABSI and heparin lock in reducing the incidence of venous thrombosis. Hospital stay was prolonged in the patients developing CVC-associated complications independently increasing morbidity in patients with severe burns, but was not found to be significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Jugular venous route should be preferred as the site of CVC insertion (easier and associated with a lower complication rate) and the duration of line kept in situ should be reduced. The blood c/s (preferably central line tip c/s) should be sent routinely after 10 days or on the first suspicion of complications to reduce the incidence and severity of CLABSI in major burn patients.","PeriodicalId":13336,"journal":{"name":"Indian journal of burns","volume":"30 1","pages":"70 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Study of central venous catheter-related complications in major burn patients\",\"authors\":\"Itisha Agrawal, Arun Bhatnagar\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ijb.ijb_1_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Routinely changing central venous catheters (CVCs) as a prevention strategy of bbloodstreaminfections in burns patients has been controversial due to the paucity of evidence for appropriate timings of line changes. This study aims to ascertain the risk factors associated with central line-associated sepsis and thrombosis and to evaluate the role of heparin lock, routine line changes, and thromboprophylaxis in reducing the risk of complications associated with central venous catheterization. Materials and Methods: A retrospective observational hospital-based study on 50 patients admitted with major burns (involving 40% or more total body surface area [TBSA] in burn intensive care unit/ward at Gandhi Medical College and Associated Hamidia Hospital from May 2021 to June 2022. Nontunneled, triple-lumen central lines were inserted usingthe Seldinger technique preferentially on healthy skin and secured with Tegaderm™ CHG Chlorhexidine Gluconate transparent dressing. The removal of central lines was done sepsis (persistent rise of fever unresponsive to antipyretics or empirical antibiotics) or when distal limb swelling edema) developed. Routine removal of the central line was also done when resuscitation was over and parenteral nutritional supplementation was no longer needed (after 12–15 days) or before shifting from HDU or on discharge. Data collection included: Demographics, co-morbidities, type and cause of burn, %TBSA, route (subclavian, femoral, and jugular line), access (healthy/burned) of line, duration of line in situ, complications (cellulitis, edema, venous thrombosis, and persistent high-grade fever), culture/sensitivity (c/s) reports, duration of hospital stay, heparin prophylaxis, or treatment. The data were processed with Chi-square test. The primary outcome of this observational study was a measure of catheter-related bloodstream infections and symptomatic deep vein thrombosis and their correlation with demographics and various comorbidities. Result: Central line duration and age were identified as independent risk factors for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), with central line duration the most significant predictor (P < 0.05). CLABSI occurred at 12.81 ± 2.967 days' postline insertion. Further research is needed to assess the role of routine line changes (every 12–15 days' postinsertion) in preventing CLABSI and heparin lock in reducing the incidence of venous thrombosis. Hospital stay was prolonged in the patients developing CVC-associated complications independently increasing morbidity in patients with severe burns, but was not found to be significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Jugular venous route should be preferred as the site of CVC insertion (easier and associated with a lower complication rate) and the duration of line kept in situ should be reduced. The blood c/s (preferably central line tip c/s) should be sent routinely after 10 days or on the first suspicion of complications to reduce the incidence and severity of CLABSI in major burn patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13336,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian journal of burns\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"70 - 77\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian journal of burns\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijb.ijb_1_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian journal of burns","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijb.ijb_1_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:常规更换中心静脉导管(CVCs)作为烧伤患者bbloodstream感染的预防策略一直存在争议,因为缺乏合适的换线时机的证据。本研究旨在确定与中心静脉导管相关性败血症和血栓形成相关的风险因素,并评估肝素锁、常规导管改变和血栓预防在降低中心静脉导管相关并发症风险方面的作用。材料和方法:一项基于医院的回顾性观察性研究,对2021年5月至2022年6月在甘地医学院和哈米迪亚联合医院烧伤重症监护室/病房收治的50名严重烧伤患者(涉及40%或以上的体表总面积[TBSA])进行了研究。使用Seldinger技术优先在健康皮肤上插入无隧道的三腔中心线,并用Tegaderm固定™ CHG葡萄糖酸氯己定透明敷料。中心线的切除是在败血症(对退烧药或经验性抗生素无反应的持续发烧)或远端肢体肿胀水肿发生时进行的。当复苏结束且不再需要胃肠外营养补充时(12-15天后),或在从HDU转移之前或出院时,也进行了中心线的常规移除。数据收集包括:人口统计学、合并症、烧伤类型和原因、%TBSA、路线(锁骨下、股骨和颈静脉线)、线路接入(健康/烧伤)、线路原位持续时间、并发症(蜂窝组织炎、水肿、静脉血栓形成和持续高烧)、培养/敏感性(c/s)报告、住院时间、肝素预防或治疗。采用卡方检验对数据进行处理。这项观察性研究的主要结果是测量导管相关血流感染和症状性深静脉血栓形成,以及它们与人口统计学和各种合并症的相关性。结果:中心线持续时间和年龄被确定为中心线相关血流感染(CLBSI)的独立危险因素,其中中心线持续期是最显著的预测因素(P<0.05)。需要进一步的研究来评估常规线路改变(每插入12-15天)在预防CLBSI和肝素锁定降低静脉血栓形成发生率方面的作用。发生CVC相关并发症的患者住院时间延长,独立地增加了严重烧伤患者的发病率,但没有发现显著性(P<0.05)。血液c/s(最好是中心线尖端c/s)应在10天后或首次怀疑并发症时定期发送,以降低严重烧伤患者CLBSI的发生率和严重程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Study of central venous catheter-related complications in major burn patients
Background: Routinely changing central venous catheters (CVCs) as a prevention strategy of bbloodstreaminfections in burns patients has been controversial due to the paucity of evidence for appropriate timings of line changes. This study aims to ascertain the risk factors associated with central line-associated sepsis and thrombosis and to evaluate the role of heparin lock, routine line changes, and thromboprophylaxis in reducing the risk of complications associated with central venous catheterization. Materials and Methods: A retrospective observational hospital-based study on 50 patients admitted with major burns (involving 40% or more total body surface area [TBSA] in burn intensive care unit/ward at Gandhi Medical College and Associated Hamidia Hospital from May 2021 to June 2022. Nontunneled, triple-lumen central lines were inserted usingthe Seldinger technique preferentially on healthy skin and secured with Tegaderm™ CHG Chlorhexidine Gluconate transparent dressing. The removal of central lines was done sepsis (persistent rise of fever unresponsive to antipyretics or empirical antibiotics) or when distal limb swelling edema) developed. Routine removal of the central line was also done when resuscitation was over and parenteral nutritional supplementation was no longer needed (after 12–15 days) or before shifting from HDU or on discharge. Data collection included: Demographics, co-morbidities, type and cause of burn, %TBSA, route (subclavian, femoral, and jugular line), access (healthy/burned) of line, duration of line in situ, complications (cellulitis, edema, venous thrombosis, and persistent high-grade fever), culture/sensitivity (c/s) reports, duration of hospital stay, heparin prophylaxis, or treatment. The data were processed with Chi-square test. The primary outcome of this observational study was a measure of catheter-related bloodstream infections and symptomatic deep vein thrombosis and their correlation with demographics and various comorbidities. Result: Central line duration and age were identified as independent risk factors for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), with central line duration the most significant predictor (P < 0.05). CLABSI occurred at 12.81 ± 2.967 days' postline insertion. Further research is needed to assess the role of routine line changes (every 12–15 days' postinsertion) in preventing CLABSI and heparin lock in reducing the incidence of venous thrombosis. Hospital stay was prolonged in the patients developing CVC-associated complications independently increasing morbidity in patients with severe burns, but was not found to be significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Jugular venous route should be preferred as the site of CVC insertion (easier and associated with a lower complication rate) and the duration of line kept in situ should be reduced. The blood c/s (preferably central line tip c/s) should be sent routinely after 10 days or on the first suspicion of complications to reduce the incidence and severity of CLABSI in major burn patients.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信