MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Air-bubble Method of Locking Central-vein Catheters: A Pilot Study

2003· article· en· W2011759957 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Z J Twardowski, Garry P. Reams, BF Prowant, HL Moore, JC Van Stone

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCatheterBacteremiaAir embolismAnticoagulantSurgeryLumen (anatomy)HemodialysisAnesthesiaAir bubbleHemodialysis CatheterAntibioticsComplicationChemistryMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The major source of catheter-associated bacteremia is contamination of the catheter hub during connection-disconnection procedures. Between dialyses, the catheter lumens are commonly locked with heparin (H), which does not prevent bacterial growth. Prophylactic use of antibiotics mixed with H reduces bacteremic episodes, but risks the development of antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria. A new method of catheter locking has been developed (U.S. Patent 6,423,050), wherein anticoagulant is injected first, followed by 0.1 ml air bubble, and a bactericidal solution. The anticoagulant is then located at the catheter tip, where clotting is a problem, and the bactericidal solution is located at the catheter hub, where bacterial contamination is common. The air bubble prevents mixing of the two solutions. A feasibility study has been conducted using H 5,000 units/ml as the anticoagulant, and acidified (pH = 2.0) concentrated (27%) NaCl (ACS) as the bactericidal solution (Twardowski ZJ and Moore HL. Bactericidal properties of acidified (pH 2.0), concentrated (27%) NaCl (ACS), a potentially useful agent for locking hemodialysis catheters. Hemodial Int. Abstracts, 2003; 7: this issue). Ten patients were randomized, either to H lock (5 patients, 62 treatments) or air-bubble method (5 patients, 56 treatments). In the control group the catheters were locked with H according to the capacity provided by the manufacturer with 0.1 ml overfill. In the experimental group, the catheters were locked with H (amount varied according to catheter fill volume), 0.1 ml air bubble, and 0.9 ml ACS. Altogether, the lumen was overfilled by 0.1 ml. According to calculations, an incidental, rapid injection of 0.1 ml air is harmless and rapid injection of up to 1.5 ml of ACS would not perceptibly affect blood pH and/or osmolality in the superior vena cava. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Missouri. There were no problems with locking of the catheters. There were no episodes of bacteremia in either group, except for one case associated with purulent drainage from the exit and same organism in both cultures. In three instances in each group, the locking solution could not be aspirated and was injected without any subjective symptoms or objective signs. We conclude that the air-bubble method of locking central-vein catheters is safe, and a full-scale prospective randomized study is feasible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis International→Same topicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis→French-language works237,207→