切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肾病研究电子杂志 ›› 2019, Vol. 08 ›› Issue (02) : 73 -77. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3216.2019.02.005

所属专题: 文献

论著

不同封管方式与带cuff的中心静脉导管失功能及感染的相关性分析
邹德平1,(), 钟文洲1, 王雪1, 陶广1   
  1. 1. 620860 四川眉山市,眉山市彭山区人民医院 血液透析室
  • 收稿日期:2017-12-22 出版日期:2019-04-28
  • 通信作者: 邹德平

Correlation analysis between different sealing methods and incapacity and infection of central venous catheter with cuff

Deping Zou1,(), Wenzhou Zhong1, Xue Wang1, Guang Tao1   

  1. 1. Department of Hemodialysis, Pengshan District People′s Hospital, Meishan 620860, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2017-12-22 Published:2019-04-28
  • Corresponding author: Deping Zou
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Zou Deping, Email:
引用本文:

邹德平, 钟文洲, 王雪, 陶广. 不同封管方式与带cuff的中心静脉导管失功能及感染的相关性分析[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2019, 08(02): 73-77.

Deping Zou, Wenzhou Zhong, Xue Wang, Guang Tao. Correlation analysis between different sealing methods and incapacity and infection of central venous catheter with cuff[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Kidney Disease Investigation(Electronic Edition), 2019, 08(02): 73-77.

目的

分析单纯肝素盐水封管与肝素联合抗生素封管对带cuff的中心静脉导管失功能、感染的影响。

方法

选取眉山市彭山区人民医院血液透析科2015年1月至2017年3月收治的92例置入带cuff的中心静脉导管的血液透析患者,按照随机数字表法平均分为实验组和对照组,实验组给予45 mg/ml肝素钠+10 mg/ml头孢呋辛钠封管,对照组单纯给予45 mg/ml肝素盐水封管;比较两组患者导管感染率、病原菌分布、其他并发症发生率及导管使用寿命;应用Kaplan-Meier法绘制导管使用曲线;采用COX回归方程分析影响导管使用时间的危险因素。

结果

(1)实验组与对照组导管感染率分别为2.17%与17.39%,差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.434,P=0.035);(2)导管相关性感染病原菌分布前三位的依次是金黄色葡萄球菌(40.0%)、链球菌(30.0%)、肠球菌属(20.0%);(3)血红蛋白水平和感染是影响导管使用时间的独立危险因素(P<0.05),抗生素封管是保护因素(P<0.05);(4)实验组与对照组感染以外并发症发生率分别为10.86%(5/46)与为30.43%(14/46),两组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=5.373,P=0.020);实验组和对照组的导管中位使用时间分别为58(13~72)周和52(9~70)周,实验组的导管失功能发生风险明显低于对照组(HR=0.395,95%CI 0.172~0.965, P=0.048)。

结论

应用抗生素与肝素钠联合封管可降低中心静脉导管感染率,减少并发症,延长使用寿命,值得临床推广。

Objective

To analyze the effect of tube-sealing method of single heparin saline or heparin saline plus antibiotics on the incapacity and infection of central venous catheter with cuff.

Methods

92 hemodialysis patients were selected, who were treated by the central venous catheter with cuff in the Department of Hemodialysis of Pengshan District People′s Hospital from January 2015 to March 2017. The patients were randomly divided into an experimental group and a control group according to the random number table method. The experimental group was given 45 mg/ml heparin saline plus 10 mg/ ml cefuroxime sodium while the control group was given 45 mg/ml heparin saline, for tube sealing. The two groups were compared in catheter infection rate, pathogen distribution, incidence of other complications, and catheter life. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to draw the catheter application curve, and the COX regression equation was used to analyze risk factors affecting use time of the catheter.

Results

(1) The catheter infection rate was 2.17% in the experimental group and 17.39% in the control group, the difference of which was statistically significant (χ2 = 4.434, P=0.035). (2) Staphylococcus aureus (40.00%), streptococcus (30.00%), and enterococci (20.00%) were the most common pathogens in the catheter-related infections. (3) Hemoglobin level and infection were the independent risk factors for the catheter survival, and the tube-sealing with antibiotics was an independent protective factor (P<0.05). (4) The incidence of complications other than infection was 10.86% (5/46) in the experimental group and 30.43% (14/46) in the control group, the difference of which was statistically significant (χ2=5.373, P=0.020). The median survival time of catheter was 52 (9 to 70) weeks and 58 (13 to 72) weeks in the control and experimental groups, respectively. The risk of catheter failure in the experimental group was significantly lower than that in the control group (HR=0.395, 95%CI 0.172- 0.965, P=0.048).

Conclusion

The tube-sealing method of heparin saline plus antibiotics could reduce the central venous catheter infection rate, reduce complications, and prolong the catheter survival, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

表1 两组患者基线资料对比[例(%),±s]
表2 两组患者导管感染率及感染部位分布
表3 两组患者病原菌分布
表4 两组患者导管并发症发生率比较[例(%)]
图1 两组患者导管使用时间的对比
表5 影响导管失功的多因素Cox回归分析
[1]
韩艳丽,吴清余,陈丹丹,等. ICU中心静脉导管相关性感染系统性护理干预的研究[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2015,25(6):1336-1338.
[2]
宋凌霞,张咏梅,罗祎,等.外周中心静脉导管相关性感染危险因素的荟萃分析[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2015,25(5):1097-1099.
[3]
Manuel W. A guide to vascular access in haemodialysis patients [J]. Br J Nurs, 2017, 26(14):1-7.
[4]
Sheikh MA, Shokr M, Ibrahim W, et al. Fibrin sheath-associated endovascular infection of the heart: the Trojan horse of indwelling central venous catheters [J]. BMJ Case Rep, 2017, 2017:bcr-2016-219060.
[5]
Gominet M, Compain F, Beloin C, et al. Central venous catheters and biofilms: where do we stand in 2017 [J]. APMIS, 2017, 125(4):365-375.
[6]
Labriola L, Pochet JM. Any use for alternative lock solutions in the prevention of catheter-related blood stream infections [J]. J Vasc Access, 2017, 18(Suppl 1):34-38.
[7]
Mishra SB, Misra R, Azim A, et al. Incidence, risk factors and associated mortality of central line-associated bloodstream infections at an intensive care unit in northern India [J]. Int J Qual Health Care, 2017, 29(1):63-67.
[8]
王红,邓孝陵,李小杰,等.肝素与抗菌药物封管预防中心静脉导管感染的临床对比研究[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2015,25(7):1590-1592.
[9]
Rus RR, Battelino N, Ponikvar R, et al. Does guidewire exchange influence infection rate related to catheters used for vascular access in children on chronic hemodialysis [J]. Ther Apher Dial, 2017, 21(1):57-61.
[10]
Nuckols TK, Keeler E, Morton SC, et al. Economic evaluation of quality improvement interventions for bloodstream infections related to central catheters: a systematic review [J]. JAMA Intern Med, 2016, 176(12):1843-1854.
[11]
沈燕慧,瞿晓青,裘琼瑶.PICC感染高危因素分析及预防措施[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2014,24(11):2702-2703.
[12]
陈耀武,陈一峰,毛和明,等.林可霉素联合肝素钠封管预防ICU中心静脉导管感染的临床研究[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2015,25(2):349-351.
[13]
张彧鹏.抗生素封管与单纯肝素封管在血透患者中心静脉导管感染预防中的作用比较[J].当代医学,2016,22(20):48-49.
[14]
Hashimoto Y, Fukuta T, Maruyama J, et al. Experience of peripherally inserted central venous catheter in patients with hematologic diseases [J]. Intern Med, 2017, 56(4):389-393.
[15]
吴允东,陈芳.抗生素封管预防血透患者中心静脉导管感染效果的Meta分析[J].北方药学,2015,12(12):144-145.
[16]
夏雷,郭小文,叶素凤,等.中心静脉导管感染因素及预防对策[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2014,24(16):3996-3998.
[17]
杨雪群,梁业梅,钟秋,等.中心静脉导管留置时间与管腔内血栓形成相关性分析[J].中国血液净化,2016,15(2):119-120.
[1] 唐博, 罗季平, 周桃, 黄多, 刘廷琼, 陈亚萍, 岳文胜. 慢性肾衰竭血液透析患者造瘘侧上肢肱动脉-指端微小动脉血流动力学变化特点分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(12): 1276-1281.
[2] 河北省抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会护理协作组. 乳腺癌中心静脉通路护理管理专家共识[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 321-329.
[3] 杨新园, 王淑君, 何成, 宋喜鹤, 刘丽芸. 预防与处理危重烧伤患者经外周静脉穿刺置入中心静脉导管堵塞的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2024, 19(05): 443-446.
[4] 张少青, 吕玉风, 董海霞. 中性粒细胞百分比/白蛋白比值对维持性血液透析患者全因死亡的预测作用[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 321-326.
[5] 杜军霞, 赵小淋, 王浩然, 高志远, 王曼茜, 万楠熙, 张冬, 丁潇楠, 任琴琴, 段颖洁, 汤力, 朱晗玉. 2 型糖尿病的血液透析患者肠道微生物组学高通量测序分析[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 313-320.
[6] 周敏, 徐阳, 胡莹, 黄先凤. 维持性血液透析患者血清β-CTX、N-MID 和PICP 与冠状动脉钙化的关系及其诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 256-260.
[7] 苏朝江, 刘佳丽, 姜燕, 许厅, 刘俪婷, 陈彦, 刘宗旸. 血透患者小直径动脉经皮腔内血管成形术后行动静脉内瘘术的疗效[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 249-255.
[8] 周祥, 张庆庆, 张雪琴, 王晓宇, 姜鸿. Meta分析庆大霉素封管液预防血透患者中心静脉导管相关感染[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 201-206.
[9] 唐全兴, 周畅. 维持性血液透析患者血清suPAR对动静脉内瘘狭窄发生的诊断价值[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(02): 74-78.
[10] 马丽洁, 赵素梅, 孙芳, 孙倩美. 平均血小板体积和平均血小板体积/血小板计数比值对血液透析患者血管通路失功的潜在预测价值[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(02): 61-67.
[11] 冯娟, 詹伟强. 维持性血液透析患者血清热休克蛋白70及簇集蛋白水平与主要不良心血管事件的相关性[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 34-38.
[12] 许厅, 熊智倩, 刘俪婷, 姜燕, 苏朝江, 刘宗旸. 维持性血液透析患者皮肤瘙痒症的发病机制及治疗研究进展[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 334-338.
[13] 赵伟, 李晓帆, 赵海丹. 维持性血液透析患者血尿酸等代谢指标的纵向数据分析[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(10): 1064-1070.
[14] 蒲蕾, 冯韵霖, 洪大情, 何强, 李贵森, 陈瑾. 蛋白质-能量消耗对血液透析患者预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(10): 1051-1057.
[15] 李达, 张大涯, 陈润祥, 张晓冬, 黄士美, 陈晨, 曾凡, 陈世锔, 白飞虎. 海南省东方市幽门螺杆菌感染现状的调查与相关危险因素分析[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 858-864.
阅读次数
全文


摘要