Comparison of Infection Rate With the Use of Antibiotic-Impregnated vs Standard Extraventricular Drainage Devices: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial
机构:[1]Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom[2]Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong[3]Centre Hospitalier Regional Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France[4]Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec,Canada[5]Penn State University, Hershey Pennsylvania[6]Singapore General Hospital,Singapore[7]Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Beijing, China[8]University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong[9]Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, United Kingdom[10]Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d’Angers, Angers, France[11]University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada[12]Greater Manchester Neurosciences Centre, Salford,United Kingdom[13]University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida[14]Xuan Wu Hospital, Beijing, China首都医科大学宣武医院[15]Codman & Shurtleff, Inc,Raynham, Massachusetts[16]Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee[17]DePuy Orthopaedics, Warsaw, Indiana[18]Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
BACKGROUND: External ventricular drainage (EVD) catheters provide reliable and accurate means of monitoring intracranial pressure and alleviating elevated pressures via drainage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). CSF infections occur in approximately 9% of patients. Antibiotic-impregnated (AI) EVD catheters were developed with the goal of reducing the occurrence of EVD catheter-related CSF infections and their associated complications. OBJECTIVE: To present an international, prospective, randomized, open-label trial to evaluate infection incidence of AI vs standard EVD catheters. METHODS: Infection was defined as (1) proven infection, positive CSF culture and positive Gram stain or (2) suspected infection: (A) positive CSF culture with no organisms identified on initial Gram stain; (B) negative CSF culture with a gram-positive or -negative stain; (C) CSF leukocytosis with a white blood cell/red blood cell count >0.02. RESULTS: Four hundred thirty-four patients underwent implantation of an EVD catheter. One hundred seventy-six patients in the AI-EVD cohort and 181 in the standard EVD catheter cohort were eligible for evaluation of infection. The 2 groups were similar in all clinical characteristics. Proven infection was documented in 9 (2.5%) patients (AI: 4 [2.3%] vs standard: 5 [2.8%], P = 1.0). Suspected infection was documented in 31 (17.6%) patients receiving AI and 37 (20.4%) patients receiving standard EVD catheters, P = .504. Duration of time to suspected infection was prolonged in the AI cohort (8.8 +/- 6.1 days) compared with the standard EVD cohort (4.6 +/- 4.2 days), P = .002. CONCLUSION: AI-EVD catheters were associated with an extremely low rate of catheter-related infections. AI catheters were not associated with risk reduction in EVD infection compared to standard catheters. Use of AI-EVD catheters is a safe option for a wide variety of patients requiring CSF drainage and monitoring, but the efficacy of AI-EVD catheters was not supported in this trial.
第一作者机构:[1]Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom
通讯作者:
通讯机构:[*1]4347 Village at Vanderbilt, Nashville, TN 37232-8618.
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
Ian Pople,Wai Poon,Richard Assaker,et al.Comparison of Infection Rate With the Use of Antibiotic-Impregnated vs Standard Extraventricular Drainage Devices: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial[J].NEUROSURGERY.2012,71(1):45090.doi:10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182544e31.
APA:
Ian Pople,Wai Poon,Richard Assaker,David Mathieu,Mark Iantosca...&Torstein Meling.(2012).Comparison of Infection Rate With the Use of Antibiotic-Impregnated vs Standard Extraventricular Drainage Devices: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial.NEUROSURGERY,71,(1)
MLA:
Ian Pople,et al."Comparison of Infection Rate With the Use of Antibiotic-Impregnated vs Standard Extraventricular Drainage Devices: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial".NEUROSURGERY 71..1(2012):45090