Systemic infections after acute stroke

After an acute stroke, systemic infection can complicate the recovery process and lead to a worse clinical outcome, including a higher risk of mortality. Post-stroke infection (PSI) is responsible for the majority of the mortality occurring between 1 week and 1 month after stroke, peaking towards the end of the second week. The effects of PSI on longer-term outcome and other aspects of recovery, such as cognition, mood and quality of life, are largely unknown. The cerebrovascular event itself may result in a systemic immunosuppressed state, hence lowering the threshold for subsequent systemic bacterial infections. Although there have been advances in the basic understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms of PSI, clinical studies have not provided any clear guidelines on the best methods of managing or preventing PSI. This article provides a review of the current knowledge of the phenomenon of PSI and the possible future developments in the understanding and treatment of PSI

CATheter Infections in CHildren (CATCH): a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation comparing impregnated and standard central venous catheters in children.

BACKGROUND: Impregnated central venous catheters (CVCs) are recommended for adults to reduce bloodstream infection (BSI) but not for children. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of impregnated compared with standard CVCs for reducing BSI in children admitted for intensive care. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial, cost-effectiveness analysis from a NHS perspective and a generalisability analysis and cost impact analysis. SETTING: 14 English paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in England. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged  1.2 per 1000 CVC-days. CONCLUSIONS: The primary outcome did not differ between impregnated and standard CVCs. However, antibiotic-impregnated CVCs significantly reduced the risk of BSI compared with standard and heparin CVCs. Adoption of antibiotic-impregnated CVCs could be beneficial even for PICUs with low BSI rates, although uncertainty remains whether or not they represent value for money to the NHS. Limitations - inserting clinicians were not blinded to allocation and a lower than expected event rate meant that there was limited power for head-to-head comparisons of each type of impregnation. Future work - adoption of impregnated CVCs in PICUs should be considered and could be monitored through linkage of electronic health-care data and clinical data on CVC use with laboratory surveillance data on BSI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01029717. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Should In-line Filters Be Used in Peripheral Intravenous Catheters to Prevent Infusion-Related Phlebitis? A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND: In this systematic review, we assessed the effect of in-line filters on infusion-related phlebitis associated with peripheral IV catheters. The study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. We used MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register up to August 10, 2009. METHODS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data on phlebitis were combined when appropriate, using a random-effects model. The impact of the risk of phlebitis in the control group (baseline risk) on the effect of in-line filters was studied by using meta-regression based on the bivariate meta-analysis model. The quality of the evidence was determined by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) method. RESULTS: Eleven trials (1633 peripheral catheters) were included in this review to compare the effect of in-line filters on the incidence of phlebitis in hospitalized patients. Baseline risks across trials ranged from 23% to 96%. Meta-analysis of all trials showed that in-line filters reduced the risk of infusion-related phlebitis (relative risk, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-1.00). This benefit, however, is very uncertain, because the trials had serious methodological shortcomings and meta-analysis revealed marked unexplained statistical heterogeneity (P < 0.0000, I-2 = 90.4%). The estimated benefit did not depend on baseline risk. CONCLUSION: In-line filters in peripheral IV catheters cannot be recommended routinely, because evidence of their benefit is uncertain. (Anesth Analg 2010; 110: 1624-9)Development and application of statistical models for medical scientific researc