|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Risk of Infection Accompanying the Use of Single-Lumen vs Double-Lumen Subclavian Catheters: A Prospective Randomized Study
Carla Powell, R.N.
Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
Peter J. Fabri, M.D.
Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
Kenneth A. Kudsk, M.D.
Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
A prospective study was undertaken to compare the risks of a multiple-lumen catheter to bilateral subclavian catheters in patients receiving total parenteral nutrition (TPN). All patients had one preexisting subclavian catheter. Patients were randomized into two groups: one group received a double-lumen catheter via a guidewire change of the preexisting single-lumen subclavian catheter. In the second group, a second single-lumen subclavian catheter was inserted and the preexisting single-lumen catheter was changed over a guidewire. Patients were followed by the Nutrition Support Service and were managed identically with regard to solutions given, catheter care, dressing changes, monitoring of mechanical complications, and evaluation of fever. Total infection rates in both groups were identical (22.7%). The difference in mechanical complication rates in the double-lumen catheter group (9%) and the group with bilateral single-lumen catheters (22.7%) was not significant by Fischer's exact test. The multiple-lumen catheter is superior in convenience and as safe as bilateral single-lumen catheters. (Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 12:127-129, 1982)
Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, Vol. 12, No. 2,
127-129 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/0148607188012002127
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
M. Zurcher, M. R. Tramer, and B. Walder
Colonization and Bloodstream Infection with Single- Versus Multi-Lumen Central Venous Catheters: A Quantitative Systematic Review
Anesth. Analg.,
July 1, 2004;
99(1):
177 - 182.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Kemp, J. Burge, P. Choban, J. Harden, J. Mirtallo, and L. Flancbaum
The Effect of Catheter Type and Site on Infection Rates in Total Parenteral Nutrition Patients
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr,
January 1, 1994;
18(1):
71 - 74.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Kruse and N. J. Shah
Detection and Prevention of Central Venous Catheter-Related Infections
Nutr Clin Pract,
August 1, 1993;
8(4):
163 - 170.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Adams, Y.-Y. Yeh, and G. L. Jensen
Changes in Plasma and Erythrocyte Fatty Acids in Patients Fed Enteral Formulas Containing Different Fats
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr,
January 1, 1993;
17(1):
30 - 34.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Clark-Christoff, V. A. Watters, W. Sparks, P. Snyder, and J. P. Grant
Use of Triple-Lumen Subclavian Catheters for Administration of Total Parenteral Nutrition
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr,
September 1, 1992;
16(5):
403 - 407.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. H. Johnson and E. B. Rypins
Single-Lumen vs Double-Lumen Catheters for Total Parenteral Nutrition: A Randomized, Prospective Trial
Arch Surg,
August 1, 1990;
125(8):
990 - 992.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. T. Gil, J. A. Kruse, M. C. Thill-Baharozian, and R. W. Carlson
Triple- vs Single-Lumen Central Venous Catheters: A Prospective Study in a Critically Ill Population
Arch Intern Med,
May 1, 1989;
149(5):
1139 - 1143.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Powell, K. A. Kudsk, P. A. Kulich, J. A. Mandelbaum, and P. J. Fabri
Effect of Frequent Guidewire Changes on Triple-Lumen Catheter Sepsis
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr,
September 1, 1988;
12(5):
462 - 464.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
