Chlorhexidine gluconate‐coated gel pad dressings for prevention of central venous catheter‐related bloodstream infections in patients with hematologic diseases or autologous stem cell transplantation: A registry‐based matched‐pair analysis

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesChlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)‐coated gel pad dressings for central venous catheter (CVC) may prevent CVC‐related bloodstream infections (CRBSI). However, real‐world data showing beneficial effects in patients with hematologic malignancies are scarce.MethodsIn a matched‐pair analysis with data from a multicenter CVC registry, non‐tunneled jugular and subclavian vein CVC in adults with hematologic malignancies or germ cell tumors (including patients receiving autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation [ASCT]) with CHG were compared with non‐CHG dressings. The primary endpoint was definite CRBSI rate within 14 days (dCRBSI14) of CVC insertion; secondary endpoints were combined rate of definite or probable CRBSI within 14 days (dpCRBSI14), overall (dpCRBSI), and CRBSI incidences of all estimates.ResultsIn total, 2070 CVCs were assessed. There was no statistically significant difference in dCRBSI14 (2.3% vs. 3.5%) between patients with and without CHG gel dressings. Likewise, with regards to dpCRBSI14 (6.2% vs. 6.3%) and the overall dpCRBSI rate (9.2% vs. 10.5%), no significant difference was detected. Furthermore, dCRBSI14 incidence (2.0 vs. 3.2/1000 CVC days), dpCRBSI14 incidence (5.4 vs. 5.6/1000 CVC days), and overall CRBSI incidence (5.5 vs. 6.0/1000 CVC days) showed no significant differences.ConclusionsCRBSI rates were not reduced by the use of CHG gel dressings in patients with hematologic malignancies and/or ASCT.