IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0010840.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prevention of Catheter-Related Bacteremia with a Daily Ethanol Lock in Patients with Tunnelled Catheters: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Lennert Slobbe
  • Jeanette K Doorduijn
  • Pieternella J Lugtenburg
  • Abdelilah el Barzouhi
  • Eric Boersma
  • Willem B van Leeuwen
  • Bart J A Rijnders

Abstract

Background: Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) results in significant attributable morbidity and mortality. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we studied the efficacy and safety of a daily ethanol lock for the prevention of CRBSI in patients with a tunnelled central venous catheter (CVC). Methodology: From 2005 through 2008, each lumen of the CVC of adult hematology patients was locked for 15 minutes per day with either 70%-ethanol or placebo, where after the lock solution was flushed through. As a primary endpoint, the incidence rates of endoluminal CRBSI were compared. Principal Findings: The intent-to-treat analysis was based on 376 patients, accounting for 448 CVCs and 27,745 catheter days. For ethanol locks, the incidence of endoluminal CRBSI per 1000 CVC-days was 0.70 (95%-CI, 0.4–1.3), compared to 1.19 (95% confidence interval, 0.7–1.9) for placebo (incidence rate-ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.27–1.30; P = .19). For endoluminal CRBSI according to the strictest definition (positive hub culture and identical bacterial strain in blood), a 3.6-fold, non-significant, reduction was observed for patients receiving ethanol (2 of 226 versus 7 of 222; P = .103). No life-threatening adverse events were observed. More patients receiving ethanol discontinued lock-therapy (11 of 226 versus 1 of 222; P = .006) or continued with decreased lock-frequency (10 of 226 versus 0 of 222; P = .002), due to non-severe adverse events. Conclusions: In this study, the reduction in the incidence of endoluminal CRBSI using preventive ethanol locks was non-significant, although the low incidence of endoluminal CRBSI precludes definite conclusions. Therefore, the lack of statistical significance may partially reflect a lack of power. Significantly more patients treated with ethanol locks discontinued their prophylactic treatment due to adverse effects, which were non-severe but reasonably ethanol related. Additional studies should be performed in populations with higher incidence of (endoluminal) CRBSI. Alternative sources of bacteremia, like exoluminal CRBSI or microbial translocation during chemotherapy-induced mucositis may have been more important in our patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00122642

Suggested Citation

  • Lennert Slobbe & Jeanette K Doorduijn & Pieternella J Lugtenburg & Abdelilah el Barzouhi & Eric Boersma & Willem B van Leeuwen & Bart J A Rijnders, 2010. "Prevention of Catheter-Related Bacteremia with a Daily Ethanol Lock in Patients with Tunnelled Catheters: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(5), pages 1-8, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0010840
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010840
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0010840
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0010840&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0010840?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0010840. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.