Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia and Buttonhole Cannulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Buttonhole (constant-site) cannulation (BHC) continues to gain popularity with home and in-center dialysis programs worldwide. However, long-term safety data are lacking. This paper reports the authors' single-center experience with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) and the efficacy of topical mupirocin prophylaxis (MP). DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This study was a retrospective prepost comparison of SAB rates after establishing MP. Fifty-six consecutive patients on home nocturnal hemodialysis via arteriovenous fistulae, mean age 51.5 +/- 10.6 years, 38% women, and vintage 44.5 +/- 34.5 months were observed for a total of 93.4 (pre-MP) and 193.5 (post-MP) patient-years. RESULTS: Ten episodes of SAB were observed, with metastatic complications in four cases, including pneumonia (n = 2), septic arthritis, and a fatal C3 epidural abscess. When analyzed by observation period, the odds ratio (OR) for SAB before versus after the introduction of MP was 6.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.3 to 32.3; P = 0.02]. Two SAB episodes occurred after the MP started. Both patients had discontinued the MP for 3 weeks (nonadherent) preceding infection; hence, no SAB episodes were observed on treatment. In an as-treated analysis, the OR for SAB in the absence of MP was 35.3 (95% CI = 2.0 to 626.7; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: BHC is associated with a significant risk of SAB with metastatic complications. In this prepost comparison of SAB rates, no infections were observed with MP. While awaiting more definitive studies, this simple intervention should be considered for patients using BHC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".