Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Randomised clinical trial: 2% taurolidine versus 0.9% saline locking in patients on home parenteral nutrition

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Fibrogenesis and inflammation contribute to the pathogenesis of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Editorial: in vino veritas - transient elastography for staging liver fibrosis in alcoholic liver disease - authors' reply

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKommentar/debatForskningpeer review

  1. Colon polyps in patients with short bowel syndrome before and after teduglutide: Post hoc analysis of the STEPS study series

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Enteral Autonomy and Days Off Parenteral Support With Teduglutide Treatment for Short Bowel Syndrome in the STEPS Trials

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Impact of Teduglutide on Quality of Life Among Patients With Short Bowel Syndrome and Intestinal Failure

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

BACKGROUND: The catheter lock solutions 2% taurolidine and 0.9% saline are both used to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) in home parenteral nutrition patients.

AIMS: To compare the effectiveness and safety of taurolidine and saline.

METHODS: This multicentre double-blinded trial randomly assigned home parenteral nutrition patients to use either 2% taurolidine or 0.9% saline for 1 year. Patients were stratified in a new catheter group and a pre-existing catheter group. Primary outcome was the rate of CRBSIs/1000 catheter days in the new catheter group and pre-existing catheter group, separately.

RESULTS: We randomised 105 patients, of which 102 were analysed as modified intention-to-treat population. In the new catheter group, rates of CRBSIs/1000 catheter days were 0.29 and 1.49 in the taurolidine and saline arm respectively (relative risk, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.04-0.71; P = 0.009). In the pre-existing catheter group, rates of CRBSIs/1000 catheter days were 0.39 and 1.32 in the taurolidine and saline arm respectively (relative risk, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.03-1.82; P = 0.25). Excluding one outlier patient in the taurolidine arm, mean costs per patient were $1865 for taurolidine and $4454 for saline (P = 0.03). Drug-related adverse events were rare and generally mild.

CONCLUSIONS: In the new catheter group, taurolidine showed a clear decrease in CRBSI rate. In the pre-existing catheter group, no superiority of taurolidine could be demonstrated, most likely due to underpowering. Overall, taurolidine reduced the risk for CRBSIs by more than four times. Given its favourable safety and cost profile, taurolidine locking should be considered as an additional strategy to prevent CRBSIs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT01826526.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftAlimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Vol/bind48
Udgave nummer4
Sider (fra-til)410-422
Antal sider13
ISSN0269-2813
DOI
StatusUdgivet - aug. 2018

ID: 56503124