Cargando…

Risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia

BACKGROUND: Although several potential risk factors have been discussed, risk factors associated with bacterial colonization or even infection of catheters used for regional anaesthesia are not very well investigated. METHODS: In this prospective observational trial, 198 catheters at several anatomi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Morin, Astrid M, Kerwat, Klaus M, Klotz, Martina, Niestolik, Roswitha, Ruf, Veronika E, Wulf, Hinnerk, Zimmermann, Stefan, Eberhart, Leopold HJ
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1079795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15774007
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-5-1
_version_ 1782123419756658688
author Morin, Astrid M
Kerwat, Klaus M
Klotz, Martina
Niestolik, Roswitha
Ruf, Veronika E
Wulf, Hinnerk
Zimmermann, Stefan
Eberhart, Leopold HJ
author_facet Morin, Astrid M
Kerwat, Klaus M
Klotz, Martina
Niestolik, Roswitha
Ruf, Veronika E
Wulf, Hinnerk
Zimmermann, Stefan
Eberhart, Leopold HJ
author_sort Morin, Astrid M
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although several potential risk factors have been discussed, risk factors associated with bacterial colonization or even infection of catheters used for regional anaesthesia are not very well investigated. METHODS: In this prospective observational trial, 198 catheters at several anatomical sites where placed using a standardized technique. The site of insertion was then monitored daily for signs of infection (secretion at the insertion site, redness, swelling, or local pain). The catheters were removed when clinically indicated (no or moderate postoperative pain) or when signs of potential infection occurred. After sterile removal they were prospectively analyzed for colonization, defined as > 15 colony forming units. RESULTS: 33 (16.7%) of all catheters were colonized, and 18 (9.1%) of these with additional signs of local inflammation. Two of these patients required antibiotic treatment due to superficial infections. Stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with catheter colonization. Out of 26 potential factors, three came out as statistically significant. Catheter placement in the groin (odds-ratio and 95%-confidence interval: 3.4; 1.5–7.8), and repeated changing of the catheter dressing (odds-ratio: 2.1; 1.4–3.3 per removal) increased the risk for colonization, whereas systemic antibiotics administered postoperatively decreased it (odds ratio: 0.41; 0.12–1.0). CONCLUSION: Colonization of peripheral and epidural nerve catheter can only in part be predicted at the time of catheter insertion since two out of three relevant variables that significantly influence the risk can only be recorded postoperatively. Catheter localisation in the groin, removal of the dressing and omission of postoperative antibiotics were associated with, but were not necessarily causal for bacterial colonization. These factors might help to identify patients who are at increased risk for catheter colonization.
format Text
id pubmed-1079795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-10797952005-04-15 Risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia Morin, Astrid M Kerwat, Klaus M Klotz, Martina Niestolik, Roswitha Ruf, Veronika E Wulf, Hinnerk Zimmermann, Stefan Eberhart, Leopold HJ BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: Although several potential risk factors have been discussed, risk factors associated with bacterial colonization or even infection of catheters used for regional anaesthesia are not very well investigated. METHODS: In this prospective observational trial, 198 catheters at several anatomical sites where placed using a standardized technique. The site of insertion was then monitored daily for signs of infection (secretion at the insertion site, redness, swelling, or local pain). The catheters were removed when clinically indicated (no or moderate postoperative pain) or when signs of potential infection occurred. After sterile removal they were prospectively analyzed for colonization, defined as > 15 colony forming units. RESULTS: 33 (16.7%) of all catheters were colonized, and 18 (9.1%) of these with additional signs of local inflammation. Two of these patients required antibiotic treatment due to superficial infections. Stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with catheter colonization. Out of 26 potential factors, three came out as statistically significant. Catheter placement in the groin (odds-ratio and 95%-confidence interval: 3.4; 1.5–7.8), and repeated changing of the catheter dressing (odds-ratio: 2.1; 1.4–3.3 per removal) increased the risk for colonization, whereas systemic antibiotics administered postoperatively decreased it (odds ratio: 0.41; 0.12–1.0). CONCLUSION: Colonization of peripheral and epidural nerve catheter can only in part be predicted at the time of catheter insertion since two out of three relevant variables that significantly influence the risk can only be recorded postoperatively. Catheter localisation in the groin, removal of the dressing and omission of postoperative antibiotics were associated with, but were not necessarily causal for bacterial colonization. These factors might help to identify patients who are at increased risk for catheter colonization. BioMed Central 2005-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC1079795/ /pubmed/15774007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-5-1 Text en Copyright © 2005 Morin et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Morin, Astrid M
Kerwat, Klaus M
Klotz, Martina
Niestolik, Roswitha
Ruf, Veronika E
Wulf, Hinnerk
Zimmermann, Stefan
Eberhart, Leopold HJ
Risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia
title Risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia
title_full Risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia
title_fullStr Risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia
title_full_unstemmed Risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia
title_short Risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia
title_sort risk factors for bacterial catheter colonization in regional anaesthesia
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1079795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15774007
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-5-1
work_keys_str_mv AT morinastridm riskfactorsforbacterialcathetercolonizationinregionalanaesthesia
AT kerwatklausm riskfactorsforbacterialcathetercolonizationinregionalanaesthesia
AT klotzmartina riskfactorsforbacterialcathetercolonizationinregionalanaesthesia
AT niestolikroswitha riskfactorsforbacterialcathetercolonizationinregionalanaesthesia
AT rufveronikae riskfactorsforbacterialcathetercolonizationinregionalanaesthesia
AT wulfhinnerk riskfactorsforbacterialcathetercolonizationinregionalanaesthesia
AT zimmermannstefan riskfactorsforbacterialcathetercolonizationinregionalanaesthesia
AT eberhartleopoldhj riskfactorsforbacterialcathetercolonizationinregionalanaesthesia