Department of Pediatric Surgery, Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Pediatrics, Emma Children's Hospital / Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Oct 7;10(10):CD003295. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003295.pub4.
This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review last published in 2013. Long-term central venous catheters (CVCs), including tunnelled CVCs (TCVCs) and totally implanted devices or ports (TIDs), are increasingly used when treating people with cancer. Despite international guidelines on sterile insertion and appropriate CVC maintenance and use, infections remain a common complication. These infections are mainly caused by gram-positive bacteria. Antimicrobial prevention strategies aimed at these micro-organisms could potentially decrease the majority of CVC-related infections. The aim of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics for the prevention of gram-positive infections in people with cancer who have long-term CVCs.
To assess the effects of administering antibiotics prior to the insertion of long-term CVCs or as a flush/lock solution, or both during long-term CVC access to prevent gram-positive CVC-related infections in adults and children receiving treatment for cancer.
The search for this updated review was conducted on 19 November 2020. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid and Embase via Ovid. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform portal for additional articles.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared either the administration of prophylactic antibiotics prior to long-term CVC insertion versus no administration of antibiotics, or the use of an antibiotic versus a non-antibiotic flush/lock solution in long-term CVCs, in adults and children receiving treatment for cancer.
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two authors independently selected studies, classified them and extracted data onto a predesigned data collection form. The outcomes of interest were gram-positive catheter-related infection events and total number of CVCs and CVC days. We pooled the data using a random-effects model for meta-analyses. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, we identified 310 potentially relevant studies and screened them for eligibility. We included one additional RCT with 404 participants. The original review included 11 RCTs with a total of 840 people with cancer (adults and children). In total this review included 12 RCTs with 1244 participants. Antibiotics prior to insertion of the CVC Six trials compared the use of antibiotics (vancomycin, teicoplanin, ceftazidime or cefazolin) versus no antibiotics given before the insertion of a long-term CVC. One study did not observe any CVC-related infection events in either group was not included in the quantitative analysis as it was not possible to calculate a risk ratio. Administering an antibiotic prior to insertion of the CVC may not reduce gram-positive CVC-related infections (pooled risk ratio 0.67, confidence interval (CI) 95% 0.32 to 1.43; control versus intervention group risk 10.4% versus 7.3% of the participants; 5 studies, 648 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We sought adverse event data, but these were not described by the authors. The overall risk of bias was deemed low. Antibiotics as a flushing or locking solution Six trials compared a combined antibiotic (vancomycin, amikacin or taurolidine) and heparin solution with a heparin-only solution for flushing or locking the long-term CVC after use. One study did not observe any CRS events and was not include this study in the quantitative analysis as it was not possible to calculate a risk ratio. Flushing and locking long-term CVCs with a combined antibiotic and heparin solution likely reduced the risk of gram-positive CVC-related infections compared to a heparin-only solution (pooled rate ratio 0.47, CI 95% 0.26 to 0.85; control versus intervention group rate ratio 0.66 versus 0.27 per 1000 CVC-days; 5 studies, 443 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial reported a higher incidence of occlusions and participants in one trial reported an unpleasant taste after flushing associated with a combined antibiotic and heparin solution. The overall risk of bias was deemed low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review, we included one additional study. There was no observed benefit of administering antibiotics before the insertion of long-term CVCs to prevent gram-positive CVC-related infections. Flushing or locking long-term CVCs with an antibiotic solution likely reduces gram-positive CVC-related infections experienced in people at risk of neutropenia through chemotherapy or disease. However, a limitation of this review is heterogeneity between the studies for both outcomes. Insufficient data were available to evaluate if the conclusions apply equally for different CVC types and for adults versus children. It must be noted that the use of an antibiotic flush/lock solution may increase microbial antibiotic resistance, therefore it should be reserved for high-risk people or if the baseline CVC-related infection rates are high. Further research is needed to identify high-risk groups most likely to benefit from these antibiotic flush/lock solutions.
这是 Cochrane 综述的更新版本,上次发表于 2013 年。当治疗癌症患者时,长期中央静脉导管(CVC),包括隧道式 CVC(TCVC)和完全植入式设备或端口(TID),越来越多地被使用。尽管有关于无菌插入和适当的 CVC 维护和使用的国际指南,但感染仍然是常见的并发症。这些感染主要由革兰氏阳性菌引起。针对这些微生物的抗菌预防策略可能会潜在地降低大多数与 CVC 相关的感染。本综述的目的是评估预防性抗生素在预防癌症患者长期 CVC 革兰氏阳性感染中的疗效。
评估在插入长期 CVC 之前或作为冲洗/锁定溶液给予抗生素,或在长期 CVC 接入期间同时给予抗生素,以预防接受癌症治疗的成人和儿童的革兰氏阳性 CVC 相关感染。
本次更新综述的检索于 2020 年 11 月 19 日进行。我们在 Cochrane 图书馆的 Cochrane 对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)、Ovid 中的 MEDLINE 和 Ovid 中的 Embase 中搜索了文章,还在 ClinicalTrials.gov 和世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台门户中搜索了额外的文章。
我们纳入了比较在长期 CVC 插入前给予预防性抗生素与不给抗生素、或在长期 CVC 中使用抗生素与非抗生素冲洗/锁定溶液的随机对照试验(RCT),纳入了接受癌症治疗的成人和儿童。
我们使用 Cochrane 预期的标准方法学程序。两位作者独立选择研究、分类并将数据提取到预先设计的数据收集表上。感兴趣的结局是革兰氏阳性导管相关感染事件和总 CVC 数量和 CVC 天数。我们使用随机效应模型对数据进行了荟萃分析。我们使用 GRADE 方法评估证据的确定性。
本次更新,我们确定了 310 项潜在相关研究,并对其进行了筛选以确定其是否符合纳入标准。我们纳入了一项额外的 RCT,共有 404 名参与者。原始综述纳入了 11 项 RCT,共 840 名癌症患者(成人和儿童)。本综述共纳入了 12 项 RCT,共 1244 名参与者。
CVC 插入前使用抗生素:六项试验比较了使用抗生素(万古霉素、替考拉宁、头孢他啶或头孢唑林)与在插入长期 CVC 之前不给抗生素。一项研究在两组中均未观察到任何与 CVC 相关的感染事件,由于无法计算风险比,因此未将其纳入定量分析。在插入 CVC 之前给予抗生素可能不会降低革兰氏阳性 CVC 相关感染的风险(汇总风险比 0.67,置信区间 95% 0.32 至 1.43;对照组与干预组风险 10.4% 与 7.3%的参与者;5 项研究,648 名参与者;中等确定性证据)。我们试图获取不良事件数据,但作者未描述这些数据。总体偏倚风险被认为较低。
六项试验比较了含有抗生素(万古霉素、阿米卡星或牛磺罗定)和肝素的联合溶液与仅含肝素的溶液,用于在使用后冲洗或锁定长期 CVC。一项研究未观察到任何 CRS 事件,由于无法计算风险比,因此未将其纳入定量分析。与仅用肝素冲洗或锁定长期 CVC 相比,使用含抗生素和肝素的联合溶液可能会降低革兰氏阳性 CVC 相关感染的风险(汇总率比 0.47,95%置信区间 0.26 至 0.85;对照组与干预组率比 0.66 与 0.27 每 1000 CVC 天;5 项研究,443 名参与者;中等确定性证据)。一项试验报告说,这种联合溶液冲洗后发生阻塞的发生率更高,并且一项试验报告说,参与者在冲洗后报告有不愉快的味道,与含抗生素和肝素的联合溶液有关。总体偏倚风险被认为较低。
自上次更新本综述以来,我们纳入了一项额外的研究。在插入长期 CVC 之前给予抗生素以预防革兰氏阳性 CVC 相关感染方面没有观察到益处。用抗生素溶液冲洗或锁定长期 CVC 可能会降低接受化疗或疾病导致中性粒细胞减少风险的患者的革兰氏阳性 CVC 相关感染。然而,本综述的一个局限性是两个结局的研究之间存在异质性。对于不同类型的 CVC 和成人与儿童,尚不清楚这些结论是否同样适用。必须注意的是,使用抗生素冲洗/锁定溶液可能会增加微生物对抗生素的耐药性,因此应保留给高危人群或如果基线 CVC 相关感染率较高。需要进一步研究以确定最有可能从这些抗生素冲洗/锁定溶液中受益的高危人群。