Catheter‐Related Infection in Uncuffed, Non‐Tunneled Dual‐Lumen Catheters: Incidence and Risk Factors by Internal Jugular Versus Femoral Site in a Retrospective Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Uncuffed, non-tunneled dual-lumen catheters are often required for kidney replacement therapy (KRT), but catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) remain a serious complication. Whether the jugular site poses a lower CRBSI risk than the femoral site is unclear. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed patients with uncuffed, non-tunneled dual-lumen catheters. CRBSI incidence, catheter dwelling time, and mortality rates were compared between jugular and femoral sites. Regression analyses identified CRBSI risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 572 patients were included in the study. The incidence proportion of CRBSI was 3.5% in both the femoral and jugular groups (10 of 286 patients in each group; p = 1.0). The incidence rates of CRBSI were 1.7 and 0.9 per 1000 patient-days for the femoral and jugular sites, respectively (p = 0.154). The median catheter dwelling time was significantly longer for jugular catheters (25 days) compared to femoral catheters (12 days; p < 0.001). The 30-day incidence proportion of death at the jugular site was significantly lower than at the femoral site (0.105 vs. 0.608, p < 0.001). Pre-existing cerebrovascular disease and congestive heart failure were identified as significant risk factors for CRBSI. CONCLUSION: For uncuffed, non-tunneled dual-lumen catheters used for dialysis vascular access, the jugular insertion site does not demonstrate a reduced risk of CRBSI compared to the femoral site. However, jugular catheter placement is associated with a longer dwelling time and a lower mortality rate.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".