Association between antimicrobial locks for hemodialysis central venous catheters and antibiotic resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antimicrobial locks (AMLs) are effective in preventing catheter-associated bloodstream infections (CABSI) in hemodialysis (HD) patients, but may increase antibiotic resistance. In our center, gentamicin-heparin locks have been used for all HD central venous catheters since July 1, 2004. We previously reported a significant reduction in CABSI rates, but a short-term trend to increased gentamicin resistance among coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS). We present a further 3-year follow-up study of bacterial resistance in our dialysis center. We examined the susceptibility of bacterial isolates from CABSI from July 1, 2006 to July 31, 2009, restricting analyses to CNS, gram-negative bacilli, and Staphylococcus aureus. We compared the frequency of gentamicin resistance in these isolates between four groups: CABSI in HD patients, non-CABSI in HD patients, peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, and bloodstream infection in the non-end-stage kidney failure general population. For CNS isolates, the frequency of gentamicin resistance was similar between the CABSI and PD peritonitis groups, but higher in both groups than the general population. The pattern was similar for S. aureus although the differences were of borderline statistical significance. The frequency of gentamicin resistance among gram-negative bacilli isolates did not differ between groups. Gentamicin resistance was more common than expected in CNS and possibly S. aureus isolates from CABSI, although this resistance may be part of a generally higher frequency of antibiotic resistance in the dialysis population, rather than a direct result of AML use. AMLs remain a valuable clinical tool although surveillance is needed to ensure that benefits continue to outweigh risks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".