This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Steven Tennenberg, MD; Mark Lieser, MD; Brenda McCurdy, PhD; Gail Boomer, BS; Ellen Howington, RN; Cheryl Newman, RN; Irma Wolf, RN

Arch Surg. 1997;132(12):1348-1351.

Abstract
Objective
To test the efficacy of the ARROWgard (Arrow International Inc, Reading, Pa) central venous catheter (CVC) coated with silver sulfadiazine and chlorhexidine (A-CVC) in the prevention of CVC-related infections.

Design
Prospective, randomized trial.

Setting
A tertiary care medical center.

Patients and Intervention
Two hundred eighty-two patients who required CVC placement were evaluated in this study. Patients were prospectively randomized to receive either a standard CVC (S-CVC) or the A-CVC. Only fresh-stick double- and triple-lumen catheters were studied.

Main Outcome Measures
Patients were evaluated for catheter site inflammation, catheter site colonization, local catheter-related infection, and catheter-related septicemia.

Results
The 2 groups were matched for age, percentage in the intensive care unit, percentage receiving total parenteral nutrition, percentage with triplelumen catheters, and duration of catheterization. Rates of catheter site inflammation in the 2 groups were similar (12% vs 10%, S-CVC group and A-CVC group, respectively). The A-CVC was associated with a significantly decreased catheter site colonization rate (49% vs 28%; 43% reduction; P<.001) and local catheter-related infection rate (22.4% vs 5.8%; 74% reduction; P<.001). Rates of catheter-related septicemia were reduced by 41% in the A-CVC group (6.4% vs 3.8%, S-CVC group and A-CVC group, respectively), but this was not statistically significant.

Conclusions
Despite a marked decrease in catheter site colonization and catheter-related infection rates, the A-CVC did not significantly reduce the incidence of catheter-related septicemia. This may be due to a greater pathogenic dependence on catheter hub contamination rather than catheter site colonization or local catheter-related infection, or the relatively short (5.2 days) duration of catheterization in this study.

Arch Surg. 1997;132:1348-1351

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Surgery, Detroit Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Mich.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

The Risk of Bloodstream Infection in Adults With Different Intravascular Devices: A Systematic Review of 200 Published Prospective Studies
Maki et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:1159-1171.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reduced colonization and infection with miconazole-rifampicin modified central venous catheters: a randomized controlled clinical trial
Yucel et al.
J Antimicrob Chemother 2004;54:1109-1115.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Cost-Effectiveness of Antiseptic-Impregnated Central Venous Catheters for the Prevention of Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection
Veenstra et al.
JAMA 1999;282:554-560.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Vascular Access Device Selection for Parenteral Nutrition
Orr
Nutr Clin Pract 1999;14:172-177.
ABSTRACT  

Efficacy of Antiseptic-Impregnated Central Venous Catheters in Preventing Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection: A Meta-analysis
Veenstra et al.
JAMA 1999;281:261-267.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Comparison of Two Antimicrobial-Impregnated Central Venous Catheters
Darouiche et al.
NEJM 1999;340:1-8.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A Randomized Trial of an Antibiotic- and Antiseptic-Coated Central Venous Catheter in the Prevention of Catheter-Related Infections
Bach and Tennenberg
Arch Surg 1998;133:1022-1022.
FULL TEXT