Multicenter, multinational, prospective cohort study of the impact of chlorhexidine impregnated versus plain central lines on central line-associated bloodstream infections

0Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: We compared the efficacy of chlorhexidine-impregnated central lines (CLs) with plain CLs in preventing central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in critically ill patients. Methods: The study was conducted from April 2023 to August 2024 in 8 hospitals across India, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Colombia, Egypt, and Turkey. Data were collected prospectively using the INICC Surveillance Online System. Cases and controls were recruited simultaneously. Data were analyzed using t tests, χ² tests, and Fisher exact tests when indicated. Relative risks (RR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results: A total of 6,672 patients were included. Patients with impregnated CLs had 4,721 CL-days, while those with plain CLs had 18,822 CL-days. The CLABSI rate in patients with impregnated CLs was 1.48 per 1,000 CL-days, compared to 4.78 per 1,000 CL-days in those with plain CLs (RR = 0.31, 95%CI = 0.14-0.67, P = .003). A subgroup analysis excluding patients with hemodialysis but using central venous catheters (CVCs) showed 1.72 CLABSIs per 1,000 CL-days in patients with impregnated CVCs compared to 5.84 per 1,000 CL-days in those with plain CVCs (RR = 0.29, 95%CI = 0.12-0.68, P = .004). Conclusions: This study highlights the significant benefits of impregnated CLs over plain CLs in reducing CLABSI rates, achieving a 69% decrease in incidence.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rosenthal, V. D., Yin, R., Jin, Z., Basri, M. N. M., Hoong, L. Y., Mohamad, F., … Tumu, N. (2025). Multicenter, multinational, prospective cohort study of the impact of chlorhexidine impregnated versus plain central lines on central line-associated bloodstream infections. American Journal of Infection Control, 53(8), 862–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2025.03.002

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free