Effects of blood flow on the antibacterial efficacy of chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine coated central venous catheter: A simulation-based pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine coated central venous catheters (CSS-CVC) may cause loss of antimicrobial efficacy due to friction between the CVC surface and sheer stress caused by the blood flow. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the antibacterial efficacy of CSS-CVC at various flow rates using a bloodstream model. METHODS: Each CVC was subjected to various flow rates (0.5, 1, 2, and 4 L/min) and wear-out times (0, 24, 48, 72, 96, and 120 hours), and the optical density (OD) 600 after a Staphylococcus aureus incubation test was used to determine the antibacterial effect of CSS-CVC. RESULTS: In the 0.5 L/min group, there was no significant change in the OD600 value up to 120 hours compared with the baseline OD600 value for CSS-CVC (P > .467). However, the OD600 values of CSS-CVC in the 1 L/min (P < .001) and 2 L/min (P < .001) groups were significantly reduced up to 72 hours, while that in the 4 L/min (p < 0.001) group decreased rapidly up to 48 hours. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that there is a doubt whether sufficient antibacterial function can be maintained with prolonged duration of catheter placement.

Effectiveness Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Remifentanil for Perioperative Management in Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Sinus Surgery.

BACKGROUND: For patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery, intranasal injection of epinephrine can cause acute increases in heart rate and blood pressure. OBJECTIVE: Among the drugs for reducing hyperdynamic effects, dexmedetomidine and remifentanil are expected to blunt the acute hemodynamic responses after intranasal injection of epinephrine. Our study compared a difference in the 2 drugs in their abilities to blunt the hemodynamic responses in intraoperative period and postoperative profile. METHODS: In this study, the patients were randomly divided into the dexmedetomidine and remifentanil groups. During the intraoperative period, the hemodynamic values were recorded. The surgical condition was assessed by a single surgeon. During the postoperative period, hemodynamic values, sedation scale score, and pain score were recorded. RESULT: No significant differences in hemodynamic variables were found between the groups before and after intranasal injection of epinephrine. Comparison of the group mean values before endotracheal intubation revealed that the blood pressure values in the remifentanil group were significantly lower than those in the dexmedetomidine group. At 2 minutes after endotracheal intubation, blood pressure and heart rate values in the remifentanil group were significantly lower than those in the dexmedetomidine group. The sedation score was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group on arrival and at 30 minutes after arrival at the postanesthetic care unit (P < .001 and P = .001, respectively). At 30 and 60 minutes after the operation, the pain scores were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group (P = .015 and P = .001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine had better postoperative sedative and analgesic effects than remifentanil for patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery in this study. Remifentanil and dexmedetomidine attenuated acute hemodynamic responses to be within normal ranges after intranasal injection of epinephrine, and no significant differences in terms of hemodynamic variables. Remifentanil was superior to dexmedetomidine in inducing hypotension during endotracheal intubation.