Central Venous Catheters versus Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: A Comparison of Indwelling Time Resulting in Colonization by Multidrug-Resistant Pathogens.

BACKGROUND: The use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) as an alternative to central venous catheters (CVCs) has steadily risen over the last two decades. However, there is an ongoing debate regarding research evidence that supports any clear advantages or disadvantages of them compared to traditional central venous lines. The present study was conducted to compare the indwelling time of CVC and PICC placements leading to microbial colonization by multidrug-resistant microorganisms (MDROs) in critically ill patients. METHODS: A single-center retrospective descriptive study was performed that reviewed the medical records of critically ill patients with colonized CVCs and PICCs who were hospitalized during a 24-month period (May 2019-May 2021). To evaluate the association between indwelling time of catheter placement and colonization rates, events were categorized into three groups, each representing a one-week time interval of catheter indwelling time: group 1: ≤7 days, group 2: 8-14 days, and group 3: >14 days. RESULTS: A total of 207 hospitalized patients with colonized PICCs or CVCs were included in the study. Of these, 144 (69.5%) had a CVC placement and 63 (30.5%) had a PICC placement. The overall colonization rate (per 1.000 catheter/days) was 14.73 in the CVC and 5.67 in the PICC cohort (p = 0.003). In the group of PICCs, 12/63 (19%) of the pathogens were MDROs and 51/63 (81%) were non-MDROs, while in the group of CVCs, 86/144 (59.7%) were MDROs and 58/144 (40.3%) were non-MDROs (p < 0.001). The colonization rate in the CVC cohort, was 6.98 for group 1, 21.57 for group 2, and 21.6 for group 3 (p = 0.019). The colonization rate of MDROs was 3.27 for group 1, 14.47 for group 2, and 12.96 for group 3 (p = 0.025). Regarding the PICC cohort, the colonization rate was 1.49 for group 1, 3.19 for group 2, and 8.99 for group 3 (p = 0.047). No significant difference existed between the three groups in terms of MDRO pathogens, with the colonization rate being 0 for group 1, 0.8 for group 2, and 1.69 for group 3 (p = 0.78). Within the CVC cohort, the most common isolated microorganism was MDR Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 44; 30.6%), followed by MDR Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 27; 18.7%). In the PICC cohort, the predominant isolated microorganism was Candida non-albicans (n = 15; 23.8%), followed by Candida albicans, coagulase-negative staphylococci, and MDR Klebsiella pneumoniae in equal numbers (n = 6; 9.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that while the indwelling time of PICC placement was longer compared to CVCs, its colonization rate was considerably lower. Furthermore, high colonization rates by microorganisms, especially MDROs, arose later during catheterization in PICCs compared to CVCs, suggesting that in terms of vascular infections, PICCs may be a safer alternative to conventional CVCs for long-term intravenous access.

Comparison of microbial colonization rates between central venous catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters.

BACKGROUND: Central venous catheters (CVCs) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs), have been widely used as intravascular devices in critically ill patients. However, they might evoke complications, such as catheter colonization that has been considered as predisposing factor for central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). Although numerous studies have compared the risk of bloodstream infections between PICCs and CVCs, comparative studies on their colonization rates are limited. OBJECTIVES: The episodes of catheter colonization in critically ill patients with CVCs or PICCs were retrospectively analysed during a two-year period in a Greek tertiary care hospital and colonization rates, microbial profiles and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns were compared. METHODS: Clinical and laboratory data of consecutive hospitalized critically-ill patients who underwent PICC and CVC placement between May 2017-May 2019 were analysed. All catheters were examined by the semiquantitative culture technique for bacterial pathogens, either as a routine process after catheter removal or after suspicion of infection. Species identification and antimicrobial resistance patterns were determined by the Vitek2 automated system. RESULTS: During the survey period a total of 122/1187 (10.28%) catheter colonization cases were identified among CVCs and 19/639 (2.97%) cases among PICCs (p = 0.001). The colonization rate was 12.48/1000 catheter-days for the CVC group and 1.71/1000 catheter-days for the PICC group (p < 0.001). The colonization rate per 1000 catheter-days due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) was 3.85 in all study cases, 7.26 (71/122) in the CVC group and 0.63 (7/19) in the PICC group (p < 0.001). Within the CVC group, the most common microorganism isolated was MDR Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 38, 31.1%) followed by MDR Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 20, 16.4%). In the PICC group, the predominant microorganism isolated was Candida spp. (n = 5, 23.8%) followed by MDR K. pneumoniae and MDR A. baumannii in equal numbers (n = 3, 14.2%). CONCLUSION: PICC lines were associated with significantly lower colonization rates comparing to the CVC ones. In addition, patterns of microbial colonization revealed a trend over the predominance of MDR gram-negatives in CVCs suggesting that PICCs might be a safer alternative for prolonged inpatient intravascular access. Prevention programs directed by local microbial ecology may diminish catheter colonization rates and CLABSIs.

Lower risk of bloodstream infections for peripherally inserted central catheters compared to central venous catheters in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) serve as an alternative to short-term central venous catheters (CVCs) for providing intravenous access in hospitalized patients. Although a number of studies suggest that PICCs are associated with a lower risk of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) than CVCs, recent data concerning specific patient groups support the contrary. In this regard, we are comparing CVC- and PICC-related CLABSI rates developed in a selected group of critically ill inpatients and evaluating the CLABSI microbiological distribution. METHODS: The study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Greece between May 2017 and May 2019. We performed a two-year retrospective analysis of the data collected from medical records of consecutive adult patients who underwent PICC or CVC placement. RESULTS: A total of 1187 CVCs placed for 9774 catheter-days and 639 PICCs placed for 11,110 catheter-days, were reported and analyzed during the study period. Among CVCs, a total of 59 (4.9%) CLABSIs were identified, while among PICCs, 18 (2.8%) cases presented CLABSI (p = 0.029). The CLABSI incidence rate per 1,000 catheter-days was 6.03 for CVC group and 1.62 for PICC group (p < 0.001). The CLABSI rate due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) among the two groups was 3.17 in CVC group and 0.36 in PICC group (p < 0.001). Within CLABSI-CVC group, the most common microorganism detected was MDR Acinetobacter baumannii (27.1%) followed by MDR Klebsiella pneumoniae (22%). In CLABSI-PICC group, the predominant microorganism was Candida spp. (33.3%) followed by non-MDR gram-negative pathogens (22.2%). CONCLUSIONS: PICC lines were associated with significantly lower CLABSI rates comparing to CVC although they were in place longer than CVC lines. Given their longer time to the development of infection, PICCs may be a safer alternative for prolonged inpatient IV access. The high prevalence of CLABSI-MDROs depicts the local microbial ecology, emphasizing the need of public health awareness.

Duration of central venous catheter placement and central line-associated bloodstream infections after the adoption of prevention bundles: a two-year retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) remain a critical and possibly fatal outcome of hospitalization. Use of central venous catheter (CVC) bundles can considerably reduce CLABSI rates in hospitalized patients. However, despite widespread adoption of these bundles in hospitals worldwide, CLABSIs still remain prevalent. The aim of the present study was to determine whether longer duration of CVCs placement is related to CLABSIs in hospitalized adults, despite the implementation of preventive bundles. Also to analyse CLABSI pathogens distribution and antimicrobial resistance profiles in different time intervals of catheterization. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed among hospitalized patients who had a CVC inserted during a 24-month period (May 2017-May 2019) and developed CLABSIs. To evaluate the association between CVC placement duration and CLABSI events, we categorized events into three groups, each representing a 10-day time interval. RESULTS: A total of 59 CLABSI cases were identified among 9774 catheter/days. The CLABSI incidence rate per 1000 catheter/days was 4.80 for duration of catheterization up to 10 days, 5.92 for duration of 11-20 days, and 8.64 for duration > 20 days(p = 0.007). The CLABSI incidence rate per 1000 catheter/days due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) among the three groups was 2.62 for catheter duration of up to 10 days, 3.83 for 11-20 days, and 3.46 for > 20 days (p = 0.14). Among CLABSIs, the most common microorganism identified was multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, which accounted for 27.1% of the cases. There was no significant difference in the type of CLABSI pathogens isolated among the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that duration of CVC placement remains an important risk factor for CLABSIs in hospitalized patients, even after the adoption of prevention bundles. The high prevalence of MDROs in our setting reflects the local epidemiology, highlighting a significant threat of urgent public health concern.

The Impact of Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Therapy on Efficacy and Safety in a Cohort of Type 1 Diabetes Patients: A 3-Year Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have found improved glycemic control with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion compared with multiple daily insulin injections for patients with type 1 diabetes, albeit for a relatively short-period of follow-up. This prospective study presents for the first time the optimization of glycemic control with insulin pumps in a cohort of Greek patients with type 1 diabetes for a 3-year follow-up period during the socioeconomic crisis in Greece. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-four patients, previously on intensified basal-bolus insulin therapy with poor glycemic control, were initially recruited. Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), hypoglycemic and diabetic ketoacidosis episodes, pump-related side effects, lipidemic profile, 24-h urine albumin excretion, body mass index, blood pressure, and total daily insulin requirements (bolus and basal) were recorded during the 3-year follow-up. Statistical analysis was initially conducted for the entire study population and after body mass index and gender stratification. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients completed the study. A statistically significant decrease of HbA1c level (P < 0.0001) was observed at the end of Year 1 and was retained for the following years for the whole population. Similarly, significantly fewer hypoglycemic episodes occurred during the follow-up period (P < 0.0001) compared with study entry. Insulin pump treatment was not accompanied with weight changes across all body mass index strata. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion achieved almost optimal glycemic control, reduced the number of hypoglycemic episodes without weight gain, and was well tolerated for the whole study period. Finally, this therapeutic approach was accompanied with lower daily insulin requirements.