Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-n5rmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-12T02:33:03.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Microbial Contamination of Arterial Infusions Used for Hemodynamic Monitoring: A Randomized Trial of Contamination with Sampling Through Conventional Stopcocks versus a Novel Closed System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Sue Crow ,
Steven A. Conrad ,
Cynthia Chaney-Rowell  and
John W. King
Sue Crow*
Affiliation:
Departments of Infection Control and Medicine, Louisiana State University Medical Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
Steven A. Conrad
Affiliation:
Departments of Infection Control and Medicine, Louisiana State University Medical Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
Cynthia Chaney-Rowell
Affiliation:
Departments of Infection Control and Medicine, Louisiana State University Medical Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
John W. King
Affiliation:
Departments of Infection Control and Medicine, Louisiana State University Medical Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
*
LSU Medical Center, PO Box 33932, Shreveport, LA 71130-3932
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Arterial catheters are now commonly used to monitor blood pressure and obtain blood samples for arterial blood gas and other laboratory determinations. Stopcocks inserted into the pressure monitoring circuit have been the primary means of obtaining blood from arterial catheters. However, these stopcock systems have been associated with nosocomial contamination and bacteremias. Because of the problems of bacterial contamination and blood wasting with the stopcock sampling systems, we compared the frequency and extent of contamination of external sampling ports and the monitoring tubing fluid in stopcocks with that of a novel closed needle-sampling system (Lab-Site, Migada Ltd, Rehovot, Israel), incorporated into pressure monitoring tubing (Abbott Laboratories Inc., North Chicago, Illinois). We found that use of the novel sampling system resulted in significantly fewer episodes of internal bacterial contamination of the arterial monitoring line (7%) than did the use of a stopcock system (61%). External contamination of the sampling port was also lower in the novel system (8%) than in the stopcock system (37%). This suggests that the closed system may reduce the risk of nosocomial infections in patients requiring arterial pressure monitoring.

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 10 , Issue 12 , December 1989 , pp. 557 - 561
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1989 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Donowitz, LB, Wenzel, RP, Hoyt, JW. High risk of hospital-acquired infection in the ICU patient. Crit Care Med. 1982;10:355–357.Google Scholar
2. Pinilla, JC, Ross, DE Martin, T, Crump, H. Study of the incidence of intravascular catheter infection and associated septicemia in critically ill patients. Crit Cam Med. 1983;11:21–25.Google Scholar
3. Weinstein, RA, Stamm, WE, Kramer, L, et al. Pressure monitoring devices. Overlooked source of nosocomial infection. JAMA. 1976;235:936–938.Google Scholar
4. Centers for Disease Control. Methods of prevention and control of nosocomial infections. In: National Nosocomial Infections Study Report. 1974-1977. Atlanta, Georgia;1988: 15–21.Google Scholar
5. Mermel, LA, Maki, DG. Epidemic bloodstream infections from hemodynamic pressure monitoring: signs of the times. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1989;10:47–53.Google Scholar
6. Maki, DG. Pathogenesis, prevention and management of infections due to intravascular devices used for inpatient therapy. In infections Associated with in-Dwelling Medical Devices. Bisno, AL and Waldvogel, FA (eds), American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.;1989:161–177.Google Scholar
7. McArthur, BJ, Hargiss, C, Schoenknecht, FD. Stopcock contamination in the ICU. Am J Nurs. 1975;75:96–97.Google Scholar
8. Walrath, JM, Abbott, NK, Captan, E, Scanlan, E. Stopcock: bacterial contamination in invasive monitoring systems. Heart Lung. 197Y;8:100–104.Google Scholar
9. Shinozaki, T, Deane, RS, Mazuzan, JE Jr, Hamel, AJ, Hazelton, D. Bacterial contamination of arterial lines: A prospective study. JAMA. 1983;249:223–225.Google Scholar
10. Abbott, N, Walrath, JM, Scanlon-Trump, E. Infection related to physiologic monitoring: venous and arterial catheters. Heart Lung. 1983;12:28–34.Google Scholar
11. Thomas, F, Burke, JP, Parker, J, et al. The risk of infection related to radial vs femoral sites for arterial catheterization. Crit Care Med. 1983;11:807–812.Google Scholar