4.6 Review

Prophylactic antibiotics for preventing early Gram-positive central venous catheter infections in oncology patients, a Cochrane systematic review

Journal

CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS
Volume 31, Issue 3, Pages 186-196

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2004.12.004

Keywords

antibiotic prophylaxis; tunnelled central venous catheters; Gram-positive infection

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Long-term tunnelled central venous catheters (TCVC) are increasingly used in oncology patients. Infections are a frequent complication of TCVC, mostly caused by Gram-positive bacteria. The objective of this review is to evaluate the efficacy of antibiotics in the prevention of early Gram-positive TCVC infections, in oncology patients. Data sources: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to July 2003. Review methods: We selected randomised controlled trials (RCT) evaluating prophylactic antibiotics prior to insertion of the TCVC, and the combination of an antibiotic and heparin to flush the TCVC, in paediatric and adult oncology patients. The primary outcome was documented Gram-positive bacteraemia in patients with a TCVC. All trials identified were assessed and the data extracted independently by two reviewers. Results: There were nine trials included. Four trials reported on vancomycin/ teicoplanin prior to insertion of the TCVC compared to no antibiotics. There was no reduction in the number of Gram-positive TCVC infections with an Odds ratio of 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.13-1.31). Five trials studied flushing of the TCVC with a vancomycin/heparin solution compared to heparin flushing only. This method decreased the number of TCVC infections significantly with an Odds ratio of 0.43 (95% Cl 0.21-0.87). Conclusion: Flushing the TCVC with a vancomycin/heparin solution reduced the incidence of Gram-positive infections. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available