References

Almuneef MA, Memish ZA, Balkhy HH, Hijazi O, Cunningham G, Francis C. Rate, risk factors and outcomes of catheter-related bloodstream infection in a paediatric intensive care unit in Saudi Arabia. J Hosp Infect. 2006; 62:(2)207-213 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2005.06.032

Bjarnsholt T. The role of bacterial biofilms in chronic infections. APMIS Suppl. 2013; (136)1-51 https://doi.org/10.1111/apm.12099

Bjarnsholt T, Alhede M, Alhede M The in vivo biofilm. Trends Microbiol. 2013; 21:(9)466-474 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2013.06.002

Brady RA, Leid JG, Calhoun JH, Costerton JW, Shirtliff ME. Osteomyelitis and the role of biofilms in chronic infection. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2008; 52:(1)13-22 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-695X.2007.00357.x

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Central line associated bloodstream infections data from National Healthcare Safety Network (Antibiotic Resistance and Patient Safety Portal). 2021. https://arpsp.cdc.gov/profile/infections/CLABSI (accessed 19 January 2021)

Cicalini S, Palmieri F, Petrosillo N. Clinical review: new technologies for prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Crit Care. 2003; 8:(3)157-162 https://doi.org/10.1186/cc2380

Cornforth DM, Dees JL, Ibberson CB Pseudomonas aeruginosa transcriptome during human infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2018; 115:(22)E5125-E5134 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717525115

Costerton JW, Stewart PS. Battling biofilms. Sci Am. 2001; 285:(1)74-81 https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0701-74

Costerton JW, Geesey GG, Cheng KJ. How bacteria stick. Sci Am. 1978; 238:(1)86-95 https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0178-86

Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Greenberg EP. Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science. 1999; 284:(5418)1318-1322 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5418.1318

Fux CA, Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Stoodley P. Survival strategies of infectious biofilms. Trends Microbiol. 2005; 13:(1)34-40 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2004.11.010

Gahlot R, Nigam C, Kumar V, Yadav G, Anupurba S. Catheter-related bloodstream infections. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci. 2014; 4:(2) https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-5151.134184

Gorski LA, Hadaway L, Hagle M, McGoldrick M, Orr M, Doellman D Infusion therapy standards of practice. Journal of Infusion Nursing. 2016; 39:S1-S159

Hallam C, Jackson T, Rajgopal A, Russell B. Establishing catheter-related bloodstream infection surveillance to drive improvement. J Infect Prev. 2018; 19:(4)160-166 https://doi.org/10.1177/1757177418767759

Høiby N. Recent advances in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in cystic fibrosis. BMC Med. 2011; 9:(1) https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-32

Høiby N, Bjarnsholt T, Moser C ESCMID guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of biofilm infections 2014. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015; 21:S1-S25 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2014.10.024

James GA, Swogger E, Wolcott R Biofilms in chronic wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2008; 16:(1)37-44 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2007.00321.x

Javeri Y, Jagathkar G, Dixit S Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Position Statement for Central Venous Catheterization and Management 2020. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2020; 24:S6-S30

Justo JA, Bookstaver PB. Antibiotic lock therapy: review of technique and logistical challenges. Infect Drug Resist. 2014; 7:343-363

Kim M, Ashida H, Ogawa M, Yoshikawa Y, Mimuro H, Sasakawa C. Bacterial interactions with the host epithelium. Cell Host Microbe. 2010; 8:(1)20-35 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2010.06.006

King B, Schulman CI, Pepe A, Pappas P, Varas R, Namias N. Timing of central venous catheter exchange and frequency of bacteremia in burn patients. J Burn Care Res. 2007; 28:(6)859-860 https://doi.org/10.1097/BCR.0b013e318159a40b

Maki DG, Kluger DM, Crnich CJ. The risk of bloodstream infection in adults with different intravascular devices: a systematic review of 200 published prospective studies. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006; 81:(9)1159-1171 https://doi.org/10.4065/81.9.1159

Mermel LA, Allon M, Bouza E Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of intravascular catheter-related infection: 2009 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2009; 49:(1)1-45 https://doi.org/10.1086/599376

Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections, 2011. 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/infectioncontrol/guidelines/bsi/index.html (accessed 19 January 2021)

Purevdorj-Gage B, Costerton WJ, Stoodley P. Phenotypic differentiation and seeding dispersal in non-mucoid and mucoid P aeruginosa biofilms. Microbiology. 2005; 151:(5)1569-1576 https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.27536-0

Ruiz-Giardin JM, Ochoa Chamorro I, Velázquez Ríos L Blood stream infections associated with central and peripheral venous catheters. BMC Infect Dis. 2019; 19:(1)

Rudkjøbing VB, Thomsen TR, Xu Y Comparing culture and molecular methods for the identification of microorganisms involved in necrotizing soft tissue infections. BMC Infect Dis. 2016; 16:(1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-016-1976-2

Rumbaugh KP, Trivedi U, Watters C, Burton-Chellew MN, Diggle SP, West SA. Kin selection, quorum sensing and virulence in pathogenic bacteria. Proc Biol Sci. 2012; 279:(1742)3584-3588 https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.0843

Sauer K, Camper AK, Ehrlich GD, Costerton JW, Davies DG. P aeruginosa displays multiple phenotypes during development as a biofilm. J Bacteriol. 2002; 184:(4)1140-1154 https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.184.4.1140-1154.2002

Scharschmidt TC, Vasquez KS, Pauli ML Commensal microbes and hair follicle morphogenesis coordinately drive Treg migration into neonatal skin. Cell Host Microbe. 2017; 21:(4)467-477 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2017.03.001

Stoodley P, Wilson S, Hall-Stoodley L, Boyle JD, Lappin-Scott HM, Costerton JW. Growth and detachment of cell clusters from mature mixed-species biofilms. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001; 67:(12)5608-5613 https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.67.12.5608-5613.2001

Uitto VJ, Nylund K, Pussinen P. The association of oral microbiota and general health. Duodecim. 2012; 128:(12)1232-1237

Wolcott RD, Rumbaugh KP, James G Biofilm maturity studies indicate sharp debridement opens a time-dependent therapeutic window. J Wound Care. 2010; 19:(8)320-328 https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2010.19.8.77709

Wolcott R, Costerton JW, Raoult D, Cutler SJ. The polymicrobial nature of biofilm infection. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2013; 19:(2)107-112 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2012.04001.x

Yu Y, Tsitrin T, Bekele S Aerococcus urinae and Globicatella sanguinis persist in polymicrobial urethral catheter biofilms examined in longitudinal profiles at the proteomic level. Biochem Insights. 2019; https://doi.org/10.1177/1178626419875089

Biofilm and catheter-related bloodstream infections

22 April 2021
Volume 30 · Issue 8

Abstract

Careful attention to detail and adherence to procedure guidelines when inserting and managing intravascular catheters has decreased the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs). In order to limit these, health professionals must understand the underlying microbiology. Biofilms can explain the clinical findings most often seen with CRBSIs, yet they are poorly understood within medicine. Bacteria growing on solid surfaces such as a catheter are predominantly in biofilm phenotype, with a group of genes active that allow the bacteria to be tolerant to antiseptics and antibiotics by producing a self-secreted protective matrix. It is unclear whether it is planktonic seeding or small fragments of biofilm breaking off into the bloodstream that eventually results in the acute infection. The literature identifies four routes for microbes to adhere to a catheter and start biofilm formation: catheter contact, catheter insertion, catheter management and non-catheter-related sources. Routine clinical culture methods are inadequate to fully identify microbes producing catheter biofilm and/or bloodstream infection, therefore DNA methods may be required to diagnose CRBSIs. Treatment is removal and reinsertion of the catheter in a different site when possible. However, antibiofilm strategies can be employed to try to salvage the catheter. The use of high-dose antiseptics or antibiotics for long durations inside the catheter and hub (antibiotic/antiseptic lock) can suppress biofilm enough to reduce the seeding of the blood below a level where the patient's immune system can prevent bloodstream infection.

Intravascular catheters, from peripheral intravenous lines to central venous lines, intra-arterial lines or even long-term ports, provide incredible benefits in the modern management of a vast majority of hospitalised patients. The multiple different benefits of catheters have led to millions of these catheters in use every day. Yet there are risks. Intravascular catheters can lead to sepsis in 0.36 patients per 1000 catheter days (Ruiz-Giardin et al, 2019). In burn units this number can reach as high as 4% to 12% of patients during their stay (King at al, 2007). In the USA there are more than 250 000 cases of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) each year, with a mortality rate from this of around 12–25% (Maki et al, 2006). CRBSIs are the number one cause of sepsis in the hospital, which leads to increased cost, morbidity and death. Perhaps the use of intravascular catheters should be limited as much as possible; however, since these catheters provide such a great benefit, it is more realistic to prevent or mitigate complications. For the health professional to limit these bloodstream infections, it is necessary to understand the underlying microbiology that produces these complications.

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting British Journal of Nursing and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for nurses. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Limited access to clinical or professional articles

  • Unlimited access to the latest news, blogs and video content