Rates of infection for single-lumen versus multilumen central venous catheters: A meta-analysis

Critical Care Medicine

Volumn 31, Issue 9, 2003, Pages 2385-2390

  Dezfulian, Cameron ^a   Lavelle, James ^a   Nallamothu, Brahmajee K ^a   Kaufman, Samuel R ^c   Saint, Sanjay ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b Ann Arbor VA Health Services   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Bactermia; Central venous catheterization; Cross infection; Indwelling catheters; Infection control; Septicemia

Indexed keywords

BACTEREMIA; BACTERIAL COLONIZATION; CATHETER INFECTION; CENTRAL VENOUS CATHETER; CLINICAL TRIAL; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; EMBASE; HUMAN; INDWELLING CATHETER; INFECTION CONTROL; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZATION; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEPTICEMIA;

BACTEREMIA; CATHETERIZATION; CATHETERIZATION, CENTRAL VENOUS; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; CROSS INFECTION; EQUIPMENT CONTAMINATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT SAFETY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; MALE; ODDS RATIO; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 0041830138     PISSN: 00903493     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000084843.31852.01     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Mermel LA: Prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Ann Intern Med 2000; 132:391-402
2. Saint S, Veenstra DL, Lipsky BA: The clinical and economic consequences of nosocomial central venous catheter-related infection: Are antimicrobial catheters useful? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000; 21:375-380
3. Maki DG: Infections caused by intravascular devices used for infusion therapy. In: Infections Associated with Indwelling Medical Devices. Bisno AL, Waldvogel FA (Eds). Washington, DC, ASM Press, 1994, pp 155-205
4. Veenstra DL, Saint S, Sullivan SD: Cost-effectiveness of antiseptic-impregnated central venous catheters for the prevention of catheter-related bloodstream infection. JAMA 1999; 282:554-560
5. Kaufman JL, Rodriguez JL, McFadden JA, et al: Clinical experience with the multiple lumen central venous catheter. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1986; 10:487-489
6. Apelgren KN: Triple lumen catheters: Technological advance or setback? Am Surg 1987; 53:113-116
7. Richet H, Hubert B, Nitemberg G, et al: Prospective multicenter study of vascular-catheter-related complications and risk factors for positive central-catheter cultures in intensive care unit patients. J Clin Microbiol 1990; 28:2520-2525
8. Pomp A, Varella L, Caldwell MD, et al: Catheter-related sepsis: Single lumen catheters (SLC) vs. triple lumen catheters (TLC). JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1988; 12:238, Abstract 122
9. Farkas JC, Liu N, Bleriot JP, et al: Single- versus triple-lumen central catheter-related sepsis: A prospective randomized study in a critically ill population. Am J Med 1992; 93:277-282
10. Yeung C, May J, Hughes R: Infection rate for single lumen v triple lumen subclavian catheters. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1988; 9:154-158
11. Miller JJ, Venus B, Mathru M: Comparison of the sterility of long-term central venous catheterization using single lumen, triple lumen, and pulmonary artery catheters. Crit Care Med 1984; 12(8):634-637
12. Powell C, Fabri PJ, Kudsk KA: Risk of infection accompanying the use of single-lumen vs. double-lumen subclavian catheters: A prospective randomized study. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1988; 12:127-129
13. Goetz AM, Wagener MM, Miller JM, et al: Risk of infection due to central venous catheters: Effect of site of placement and catheter type. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1998; 19:842-845
14. Ma TY, Yoshinaka R, Banaag A, et al: Total parenteral nutrition via multilumen catheters does not increase the risk of catheterrelated sepsis: A randomized, prospective study. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 27:500-503
15. Kemp L, Burge J, Choban P, et al: The effect of catheter type and site on infection rates in total parenteral nutrition patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1994; 18:71-74
16. Clark-Cristoff N, Watters VA, Sparks W, et al: Use of triple-lumen subclavian catheters for administration of total parenteral nutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1992; 16:403-407
17. Johnson BH, Rypins EB: Single-lumen vs double-lumen catheters for total parenteral nutrition. Arch Surg 1990; 125:990-992
18. Gil RT, Kruse JA, Thill-Baharozian MC, et al: Triple- vs single-lumen central venous catheters. Arch Intern Med 1989; 149:1139-1143
19. Pemberton LB, Lyman B, Lander V, et al: Sepsis from triple- vs. single-lumen catheters during total parenteral nutrition in surgical or critically ill patients. Arch Surg 1986; 121:591-594
20. McCarthy MC, Shires JK, Robison RJ, et al: Prospective evaluation of single and triple lumen catheters in total parenteral nutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1987; 11:259-262
21. Lee RB, Buckner M, Sharp KW: Do multilumen catheters increase central venous catheter sepsis compared to single-lumen catheters? J Trauma 1988; 28:1472-1475
22. Rose SG, Pitsch RJ, Karrer FW, et al: Subclavian catheter infections. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1988; 12:511-512
23. Henriques HF III, Karmy-Jones R, Knoll SM, et al: Avoiding complications of long-term venous access. Am Surg 1993; 59:555-558
24. Lugo LJ, Zapata NJ, Ramirez-Ronda CH: Catheter related infections in Damas hospital. Bol Asoc Med P R 86(4-6):37-41, 1994
25. Hilton E, Haslett TM, Borenstein MT, et al: Central catheter infections: Single- versus triple-lumen catheters. Am J Med 1988; 84:667-672
26. Eyer S, Brummitt C, Crossley K, et al: Catheter-related sepsis: Prospective, randomized study of three methods of long-term catheter maintenance. Crit Care Med 1990; 18:1073-1079
27. Kovacevich DS, Faubion WC, Braunschweig CL, et al: Prevalence of catheter sepsis in parenteral nutrition patients with triple lumen vs. single lumen catheters. Abstr. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1988; 12:23S, Abstract 123
28. Misny P, Srp F, Marein C, et al: Complications of single lumen (SLC) versus multilumen (MLC) temporary central venous catheters (TCVC) for total parenteral nutrition (TPN). JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1986; 17S, Abstract 86
29. Maki DG, Weise CE, Sarafin HW: A semi-quantitative culture method for identifying intravenous catheter-related infection. N Engl Med 1977; 296:1305-1309
30. DerSimonian R, Laird N: Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986; 7:177-188
31. Bradburn MJ, Deeks JJ, Altman DG: metan: An alternative meta-analysis command. Stata Tech Bull 1998; 44(sbe24):4-15
32. Savage AP, Picard M, Hopkins CC, et al: Complications and survival of multilumen central venous catheters used for total parenteral nutrition. Br J Surg 1993; 80:1287-1290
33. Mantese VA, German DS, Kaminski DL, et al: Colonization and sepsis from triple-lumen catheters in critically ill patients. Am J Surg 1987; 154:597-601
34. Viale P, Politi E, Sisti M, et al: Impact of central venous catheters (CVC) management on infectious risk. Abstr. J Hosp Infect 1998; 40(Suppl A):8.1.8
35. Veenstra DL, Saint S, Saha S, et al: Efficacy of antiseptic-impregnated central venous catheters in preventing catheter-related bloodstream infection. JAMA 1999; 281:261-267
36. Lelorier J, Gregoire G, Benhaddad A, et al: Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med 1997; 8:536-542
37. Ioannidis JPA, Cappelleri JC, Lau J: Issues in comparisons between meta-analyses and large trials. JAMA 1998; 279:1089-1093