Mechanical Complications in Central Lines Using Taurolidine Versus Ethanol Lock Therapy in Children With Intestinal Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Ethanol lock therapy (ELT) is effective in reducing rates of catheter-related-bloodstream infections (CRBSI) in the pediatric intestinal failure (IF) population; however, ELT may increase the risk of line occlusion and breakage, significantly impacting preservation of vascular access. During a period of ethanol shortage, Health Canada temporarily approved the use of taurolidine lock therapy (TLT) in pediatric iF patients previously utilizing ELT. This provided a unique opportunity to directly compare rates of central venous catheter (CVC) complications, including CRBSi, breaks, occlusions, repairs and replacements in patients who utilized both ELT and TLT. METHODS: A retrospective study of pediatric IF patients managed by three Western Canadian intestinal rehabilitation programs was performed. Event rates in patients who used both ELT and TLT during the study period were compared using Poisson regression analysis. RESULTS: In 13 patients with 10,187 catheter days (CDs), TLT (vs ELT) had lower rates of CVC breaks (1.11 vs 5.19/1000 CDs, P < 0.001), occlusions (0.83 vs 4.06/1000 CDs, P = 0.01) and repairs (1.94 vs 5.64/1000 CDs, P = 0.01). There was no difference in CRBSI rates (0.83 vs 2.03/1000 CDs, P = 0.25) or rates of CVC replacements due to mechanical events (0.28 vs 1.81/1000 CDs, P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was no difference in CRBSI rates, TLT was associated with lower rates of mechanical complications compared to ELT in this study. Taurolidine may be a suitable alternative to ethanol in preventing CRBSI and may be associated with improved preservation of central lines in children with IF.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".