-
International Journal of Nursing Studies Jan 2024Central venous catheters are commonly used in healthcare, but they come with a range of potential complications. Over the last 15 years, an influx of securement and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Central venous catheters are commonly used in healthcare, but they come with a range of potential complications. Over the last 15 years, an influx of securement and dressing products has been released, with unknown overall effectiveness to prevent these complications.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effects of dressings and securement devices for central venous catheters on a range of common complications including catheter-related bloodstream infection, catheter tip colonisation, entry/exit-site infection, skin colonisation, skin irritation, failed catheter securement, dressing durability and mortality.
DESIGN
Systematic review with meta-analysis.
METHODS
Following standard Cochrane methods, a systematic search of Cochrane Wounds Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, EBSCO CINAHL, and multiple clinical trial registries was completed in November 2022. Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of dressing and securement devices for all CVC types were included. A random-effects model was used during the meta-analysis. Results were expressed using risk ratio (RR), rate ratio, or mean difference (MD), with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Methodological quality and bias were assessed.
RESULTS
We included 46 studies involving 10,054 participants. All studies had either an unclear or high-performance bias. The blinding of outcome assessment was unclear in most studies. Chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressings, compared with standard polyurethane dressings, may reduce the incidence (7 studies; N = 5816; RR 0.60, 95 % CI 0.44-0.83; low certainty evidence) and rate (4 studies; N = 4447; RR 0.51, 95 % CI 0.32-0.79; moderate certainty evidence) of catheter-related bloodstream infection and catheter tip colonisation (8 studies; N = 4788; RR 0.70, 95 % CI 0.52-0.95; very low certainty evidence). Medication-impregnated dressings may reduce the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection (6 studies; N = 5687; RR 0.60, 95 % CI 0.39-0.93; low certainty evidence) and catheter-tip colonisation (7 studies; N = 4769; RR 0.60, 95 % CI 0.47-0.76; low certainty evidence) relative to non-impregnated dressing types. Tissue adhesive may increase the risk of skin irritation or damage compared with integrated securement dressings (3 studies; N = 166; RR 1.88, 95 % CI 1.09-3.24; low certainty evidence) or sutureless securement devices (4 studies; N = 241; RR 1.64, 95 % CI 1.10-2.44; moderate certainty evidence). Tissue adhesive increased dressing durability compared with integrated securement dressings (MD 43.03 h, 95 % CI 4.88-81.18; moderate certainty evidence) and sutureless securement devices (MD 42.90 h, 4.64-81.16; moderate certainty evidence). Tissue adhesive increased failed catheter securement rate compared with suture (2 studies; N = 103; RR 9.33, 95 % CI 1.10-79.21; moderate certainty evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of the review provide insights and guidance for clinicians in selecting the appropriate dressings and securements for catheters. Findings should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity in catheters and patient types.
REGISTRATION
#CD010367.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
Time to implement chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressings to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections; a meta-analysis by @GraceNP and team.
Topics: Humans; Central Venous Catheters; Tissue Adhesives; Bandages; Sepsis
PubMed: 37879273
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104620 -
Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences Feb 2024This systematic review examines the efficacy and biocompatibility of orthodontic clear aligner tooth aligners constructed from polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PeT-G),...
Effectiveness and Biocompatibility of Tooth Aligners Made from Polyethylene Terephthalate Glycol (PeT-G), Polypropylene (PP), Polycarbonate (PC), Thermoplastic Polyurethanes (TPUs), and Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA): A Systematic Review.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review examines the efficacy and biocompatibility of orthodontic clear aligner tooth aligners constructed from polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PeT-G), polypropylene (PP), polycarbonate (PC), thermoplastic polyurethanes (TPUs), and ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
To find relevant papers published through September 2021, PubMed was searched extensively. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing the effectiveness and biocompatibility of the aligner materials were included. Data were extracted independently, and the quality of included research was appraised using relevant procedures. The research variability necessitated a narrative synthesis.
RESULTS
Five studies were included for comparison. All materials were biocompatible; however, PeT-G and EVA aligners caused the least tissue irritation. Patients preferred TPU aligners for initial comfort and PeT-G aligners for transparency and endurance.
CONCLUSION
Biocompatible PeT-G, PP, PC, TPU, and EVA tooth aligners fix malocclusions. Aligner materials should be chosen based on patient preferences, treatment goals, and material qualities. For stronger proof, a longer-term study is needed.
PubMed: 38595485
DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_883_23 -
Handchirurgie, Mikrochirurgie,... Aug 2023Breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC) is being discussed as a distinct malignant tumour entity originating from the implant capsule. The FDA and...
BACKGROUND
Breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC) is being discussed as a distinct malignant tumour entity originating from the implant capsule. The FDA and the ASPS published a safety communication on BIA-SCC in 2022, with a first case report of BIA-SCC having been published in the 1990s. This manuscript summarises the current scientific data on this rare tumour entity.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This systematic literature review from two independent databases includes all publications of cases with histopathologically confirmed BIA-SCC. Data extraction included study design, demographic data, implant information and details regarding diagnosis and treatment.
RESULTS
Nineteen cases of BIA-SCC with a mean age of 57±10 years were reported in 16 publications. In most cases, the indication was aesthetic augmentation (n=13). Both silicone (n=11) and saline (n=7) implants with different surfaces (smooth n=3, textured n=3, polyurethane n=1) were used. Symptoms such as unilateral swelling (n=18), pain (n=14) and erythema (n=5) occurred on an average of 23±9 years after implantation. Imaging showed fluid collection (n=8) or a tumour mass (n=4) around the breast implant. The most common surgical treatment was explantation with capsulectomy. Metastasis was described in 6 cases.
CONCLUSIONS
BIA-SCC is a malignant tumour entity associated with breast implant capsules. Based on current low-quality data (level of evidence class V), no definitive conclusion regarding correlation and causality of SCC in patients with breast implants can be drawn. There is an urgent need for national and international breast implant and breast cancer registries to obtain valid data on the incidence, pathogenesis and clinical presentation of rare tumour entities.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Aged; Female; Breast Implants; Breast Neoplasms; Breast Implantation; Device Removal; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell
PubMed: 37473774
DOI: 10.1055/a-2108-9111 -
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) Oct 2023Radiation dermatitis (RD) is the most common side effect of adjuvant whole-breast or chest wall irradiation, majorly impacting quality of life in numerous patients. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Radiation dermatitis (RD) is the most common side effect of adjuvant whole-breast or chest wall irradiation, majorly impacting quality of life in numerous patients. The use of barrier films (polyurethane dressings such as Hydrofilm® and Mepitel® film remaining on the skin for the duration of the radiation treatment) has been investigated as a prophylactic measure in several prospective trials. Here, we critically appraise the available evidence behind preventive barrier film application in the context of breast cancer treatment.
METHODS
International literature was reviewed and high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The results of 5 RCTs (663 patients; >90% Caucasian) were analysed. Overall, barrier films lead to improved clinician- and patient-reported outcomes: fewer grade ≥2 RD (11% vs. 42%; OR = 0.16; p < 0.001) and moist desquamation (2% vs. 16%; OR = 0.12; p = 0.006), as well as less patient-reported pain (standardised mean difference [SMD] -0.51; p < 0.001), itching (SMD -0.52; p = 0.001), burning (SMD -0.41; p = 0.011), and limitations in daily activities (SMD -0.20; p = 0.007). Furthermore, barrier films have a high acceptance rate among patients, as well as a favourable cost-benefit ratio. Possible side effects due to its application are mild and mostly self-limiting. Overall, there was a lack of information on the radiation treatment techniques used.
CONCLUSION
The evidence presented in this meta-analysis suggests that barrier films are an excellent tool in the prevention of RD among Caucasian patients receiving whole-breast or chest wall irradiation. Its use should therefore be considered routinely in these patients.
Topics: Humans; Female; Breast Neoplasms; Radiodermatitis; Skin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37473629
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2023.07.001