Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-confirmed Bloodstream Research Articles

Bloodstream infections in a Brazilian Pediatric Tertiary Oncology Hospital: 30-month analysis regarding the classification of the infection, distribution of microorganisms and their resistance profile

Abstract Background Infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in pediatric oncology patients during their treatment. Bloodstream infections are the main site of infection in these patients. Bacteremia in these patients can be secondary to a primary infectious focus, result from central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) or mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI). Methods Descriptive study of bloodstream infections in pediatric patients undergoing oncological treatment and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in a tertiary pediatric oncology hospital in Brazil from January 1st, 2021 to June 30th, 2023. Infections were classified according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/ National Healthcare Safety Network (CDC/NHSN) criteria into CLABSIs, MBI-LCBIs and secondary bloodstream infections. Among the bloodstream infections that met CDC/NHSN criteria for CLABSI, were analyzed separately those who also met the criteria of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) according to Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). Results During this period were diagnosed 335 episodes of bloodstream infection (123 episodes in 2021, 150 in 2022 and 62 episodes in the first 6 months of 2023). There were 378 microorganisms isolated. These infections were classified into: 35% CLABSIs, 27% MBI-LCBIs, 23% CRBSIs, and 15% secondary bloodstream infections. Among the CLABSIs, the most common microorganisms were non-fermenting gram negative bacilli (NFGNB) 38%, enterobacteriaceae 35% and coagulase-negative staphylococcus (CoNS) 11%. Between CRBSIs, there were 31% enterobacteriaceae, 22% CoNS and 19% NFGNB. Among the MBI-LCBIs there were 66% enterobacteriaceae and 23% group viridans streptococci (VGS). Streptococcus pneumoniae (33%) was the most common microorganism in secondary infections followed by Staphylococcus aureus (17%). Assessing all infections together, the main enterobacteriaceae were Klebsiella spp. (40%) and only 50% of them were sensitive to cefepime while 10% were carbapenems resistant. Among NFGNB, 13% of Pseudomonas spp. and 5% of Acinetobacter spp. were carbapenems resistant. Between the gram-positive bacteria, 77% of the S. aureus were methicillin sensitive, the same percentage of the VGS were sensitive to cefepime. Conclusion Among bloodstream infections, there were a predominance of CLABSI followed by MBI-LCBIs. Antimicrobial resistance between gram-positive bacteria, is of little concern in our institution. In the case of gram-negative bacteria, resistance to cefepime is becoming worrying among enterobacteriaceae.

The Effect of Gastrointestinal Mucositis Care Training Given to Pediatric Leukemic Patients and Caregivers on Mucosal Barrier Injury

Background Management of chemotherapy-induced mucosal barrier damage and oral/anal mucositis in leukemia is challenging. Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of mucositis care training given to children receiving leukemia treatment and their caregivers on caregiver knowledge and skills, the development of gastrointestinal mucositis in children, the mean oral mucositis area in children, and the mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection in the clinic. Methods A stepped-wedge, quasi-experimental, unpaired control group design was used. The participants in the control group were given routine training, and the intervention group members were given mucositis care training in accordance with the guideline recommendations. Results No significant difference was found between groups in developing anal mucositis, but a significant difference in developing oral mucositis was documented, with the mean mucositis area of children being 8.36 ± 3.97 cm2 in the control group and 4.66 ± 2.90 cm2 in the intervention group. The mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection ratio was 4 per 1000 catheter days in the control group and 3 per 1000 catheter days in the intervention group. Conclusion Mucositis care training had a significant positive effect on caregivers’ knowledge and skills, the development of oral mucositis, and the mean oral mucositis area in children. However, the training had no effect on the development of anal mucositis or the infection rate in the clinic. Implications for Practice Nurses might increase the knowledge and skill levels of caregivers with training on mucositis care, prevent the development of mucositis, and reduce the mean mucositis area. Training might also contribute to the reduction in the infection rate of the clinic.

Reducing ambulatory central line-associated bloodstream infections: A family-centered approach.

Ambulatory central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) cause significant morbidity and mortality, especially in pediatric oncology. Few studies have had interventions directed toward caregivers managing central lines (CL) at home to reduce ambulatory CLABSI rates. We aimed to reduce and sustain our ambulatory CLABSI rate by 25% within 3years of the start of a quality improvement intervention. Plan-do-study-act cycles were implemented beginning April 2016. The main intervention was a family-centered CL care skill development curriculum for external CLs. Training began upon hospital CL insertion, followed by an ambulatory teach-back program to achieve home caregiver CL care independence. Other changes included: standardizing ambulatory nurse CL care practice (audits, a train the nurse trainer process, and workshops for independent home care agencies); developing aids for trainers and caregivers; providing supplies for clean surfaces; wide dissemination of the program; and minimizing opportunities of CLABSI (e.g., standardizing timing of CL removal). The outcome measure was the ambulatory CLABSI rate (excluding mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection), compared pre intervention (January 2015 to March 2016) to post intervention, including 2years of sustainability (April 2016 to June 2023), using statistical process control charts. We estimated the total number of CLABSI and associated healthcare charges prevented. The ambulatory CLABSI rate decreased by 52% from 0.25 to 0.12 per 1000 CL days post intervention, achieved within 27months; 117 CLABSI were prevented, with $4.2 million hospital charges and 702 hospital days avoided. Focusing efforts on home caregivers CL care may lead to reduction in pediatric oncology ambulatory CLABSI rates.

2723. High Mortality and Resistance in Patients with Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections (MBI-LCBI)

Abstract Background Since its definition, MBI-LCBI is a pathology increasingly studied and frequent, however, with the growing threat of multidrug resistance (MDR), it is very important to have pharmacological resources for the treatment and local epidemiology. The economic constraints that many institutions suffer in lower middle-income countries may result in worse outcomes in MBI-LCBI and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) patients. In Ecuador, only ceftazidime/avibactam is available for the CRE treatment, and it is not considered in the Ecuadorian National formulary (EFN), that means it is not available in public health institutions. Methods A retrospective study was conducted in two cancer reference hospitals in Ecuador, from January 2019 to December 2021. All patients with MBI-LCBI according to CDC criteria were included. Demographic, diagnostic, and microbiological isolation data were collected. Strains identification and susceptibility were performed on Vitek 2 system and Kirby Bauer, following CLSI 2022 recommendations and cut-off points. The CRE resistance mechanism was confirmed by PCR. Thirty-day episode mortality was assessed, and compared between susceptible and MDR cases. Data are shown with means, and Chi-Square test was used to evaluate differences between mortality. SPSS version 25 was used. Results 148 episodes of MBI-LCBI in cancer patients were detected. Figure 1 shows etiology and susceptibity of strains. Sixty one (41.3%) MBI-LCBI causing microorganisms were MDR; 25 (68.8%) were BLEE/AmpC isolates and 19 (31.1%) were CRE. The mortality rate of MBI-LCBI patients was 48.6% (72). There was no difference between deaths from BLEE/AMPc versus susceptible bacteremia (22,2% vs. 27,6% p=0,44), however, mortality from CRE strains was higher compared to susceptible strains (20,8% vs. 2,6% p=0.001) figure 2. The risk of dying with MBI-LCBI with CRE strains was OR: 4.5 (95% CI;1.3-15; p=0.01). Conclusion There is a high percentage of resistance and mortality in MBI-LCBI, more notorious when the cause is CRE. This alerts us to the need of further research in this pathology and its appropriate treatment. Ecuadorian health authorities should consider review the EFN to include new active drugs for treatment CRE infections. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Applying mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection criteria in patients with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies: A retrospective cohort study looking for the real source of infection.

We evaluated the interference of the mucosal barrier injury (MBI) laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI) criteria on the central-line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) incidence density, and the proportion of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) among those classified as MBI. We detected 339 CLABSIs: 15.0% were classified as MBI-LCBIs, and among these, 19.6% were classified as CRBSIs.

Evaluation of central line salvage for mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI) management practices in patients with hematologic malignancies

Patients with underlying hematologic malignancy (HM) and/or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) recipients are at risk for mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI) secondary to bacterial translocation. There is sparse data comparing MBI-LCBI management practices, in particular central venous catheter (CVC) salvage versus removal. We created a 22-item poll of Infectious Disease specialists at major US cancer centers on management controversies. Response rate was 44% (31/70). CVC salvage was a common practice among 87.5%. This was followed by a single center retrospective study (2017–2019) comparing outcomes related to CVC practices. We identified 115 patients, 52% (60/115) admitted for chemotherapy and 33% (38/115) for allogeneic HCT. The majority of patients (78%, 90/115) had their CVC removed. There was no difference in 72 h defervescence, microbiological clearance, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day recurrent infection between CVC salvage versus removal. CVC salvage is a safe approach in certain clinical scenarios.

No Device, No Problem? Healthcare-Associated Bloodstream and Urinary Tract Infections in a Children’s Hospital

Background: Central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) and catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) definitions continue to be refined to ensure accuracy. As facilities decrease CLABSI and CAUTI, and as midline catheters become more widely utilized, we sought to understand our non–central-line bloodstream infections (NCLBSI) and non–catheter-associated urinary tract infections (NCAUTI). Total healthcare-associated bloodstream infections (HABSIs) and urinary tract infections (HAUTIs) may provide more objective measures. Methods: The CHOC Children’s Hospital is a 334-bed quaternary-care hospital in Orange, California, with 146 intensive care unit (ICU) beds. We retrospectively reviewed all HABSIs (CLABSIs + NCLBSIs) and HAUTIs (CAUTIs + NCAUTIs) from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2019, for demographic and microbiologic data. Both HABSI and HAUTI were defined as healthcare-associated infection when the date of event occurs on or after the third calendar day of admission. CLABSI and CAUTI were both defined using CDC-NHSN criteria. Mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections were excluded. Results: In a 3-year period, there were 100 HABSIs, of which 26 (26%) were NCLBSIs. The mean age for HABSI was 81 months. Enteric gram-negative infections (42%) and Staphylococcus aureus (35%) were the most common etiology for NCLBSI. The most common etiologies for CLABSI were coagulase-negative staphylococci (23%), Staphylococcus aureus (22%), and enteric gram-negatives (22%). Pseudomonas aeruginosa accounted for 16% of CLABSIs, but no NCLBSIs (Fig. 1). There was 1 midline catheter NCLBSI. There were 49 HAUTIs, of which 39 (80%) were NCAUTIs. One asymptomatic bacteremic urinary tract infection was included with the CAUTIs. The mean age for HAUTI was 55 months. The most common etiology of CAUTI was Pseudomonas aeruginosa (50%), whereas for NCAUTI the most common etiology was enteric gram-negative organisms (69%) (Fig. 2). In total, 11 HAUTIs (22%) resulted in secondary sepsis. Most HABSIs and HAUTIs occurred in the ICU setting. There were 6 deaths (6%) among HABSI patients and 3 deaths (8%) among HAUTI patients within 2 weeks of infection (Fig. 3). Conclusions: A preponderance of HABSIs were CLABSIs, but most HAUTIs were NCAUTIs. Although patient demographic and microbiologic differences exist in CLABSIs and NCLBSIs as well as CAUTIs and NCAUTIs, S. aureus and P. aeruginosa are important pathogens, particularly in device-associated infections. Trending total numbers of HABSIs and HAUTIs may be less subjective and may avert the shifting of categories seen with increased use of midline catheters. In addition, non–device-associated infections are potential causes of morbidity and mortality.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Surveillance of catheter-related bloodstream infections in haemato-oncology patients: comparison of two definitions

In the Netherlands, the PREZIES surveillance is used for registration and surveillance of central venous catheter (CVC) -related bloodstream infections (CRBSI). We investigated how this Dutch definition correlated with internationally used definitions for CRBSI, central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) and mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections (MBI-LCBI). We determined that the Dutch PREZIES definition of CRBSI is appropriate for surveillance control of CVC care bundle use in haemato-oncology patients managed with multi-lumen CVCs.

Daily Chlorhexidine Gluconate Bathing Reduces the Rate of Bloodstream Infections in Adults Undergoing Inpatient Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Introduction: While hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has great therapeutic potential, intensive conditioning regimens and variability in time to stem cell engraftment result in a period of pancytopenia and immunosuppression in which patients are vulnerable to infection. Bloodstream infections (BSIs) occur in 20-45% of inpatient autologous and allogeneic transplant patients, leading to prolonged hospitalization and increased mortality. One method of infection prevention is daily application of the antiseptic chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG). Daily CHG bathing, either with a CHG wash or with application of CHG-impregnated cloths, has been shown to reduce the incidence of all-cause hospital-acquired BSIs in critically ill patients, such as those in the ICU, though very few studies include HSCT patients. Methods: We conducted an observational cohort study to assess the impact of daily CHG bathing on the rate of BSIs among adults undergoing inpatient HSCT at the Duke University Medical Center. Patients were included if they were admitted for pre-transplant conditioning and inpatient monitoring for allogeneic or autologous HSCT from January 2016 through December 2018. CHG bathing was instituted in January 2017 for all patients admitted to the inpatient HSCT unit using 2% CHG-impregnated cloths (SAGE™), providing one year of data with no CHG bathing and two years of data with bathing. Patients were tracked from admission until unit discharge, transfer, or first infection. Laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections (LCBI), central-line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI), and mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections (MBI-LCBI) were determined per CDC/NHSN definitions. An additional variable of "clinically-significant infection" was recorded; this included both laboratory-confirmed BSIs and infections deemed significant by the treatment team but that did not meet CDC/NHSN criteria. For example, patients that were febrile, hypotensive, and treated with antibiotics, but with only one positive culture of a common commensal were deemed to have a clinically-significant BSI. Because not all patients adhered to CHG, patients were grouped into four categories by rate of daily CHG usage: High (>75%), Medium (50-75%), Low (1-49%), and None (0%). Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes between groups were compared via ANOVA, Chi-squared test, or Cochran-Armitage two-sided trend test. Multivariate analysis using the Fine-Grey subdistribution hazard model was conducted to compare time to all infection variables, accounting for the effects of CHG usage, antibiotic prophylaxis regimen, and type of transplant. Results: We evaluated 192 patients hospitalized for HSCT, including 118 (62%) allogeneic transplants and 74 (38%) autologous transplants. Of these, 25 (13%) had high CHG usage, 33 (17%) medium, 45 (23%) low, and 89 (46%) none. Demographics and transplant characteristics were evenly matched between the CHG usage groups with the exception that high usage groups were more likely to receive levofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis (p=0.003). Increased CHG usage was significantly associated with decreased incidence of clinically-significant infection (p=0.006), CLABSI (p=0.04), and MBI-LCBI (p=0.002) (Table 1). Multivariate analysis did not demonstrate a significant contribution of antibiotic prophylaxis regimen. No significant difference was found between CHG usage groups in median days to stem cell engraftment, incidence of febrile neutropenia or C. difficile infection, or rashes requiring medical treatment. There were no rashes attributable to CHG usage. Among patients who were VRE rectal swab negative on admission, there was a significant trend toward lower rates of VRE acquisition with increasing CHG usage (High CHG 13.6% vs No CHG 25.3%, p=0.02). Discussion: Increased CHG usage is associated with a significant trend toward lower rates of clinically-significant infection, CLABSI, MBI-LCBI, and VRE colonization in adult inpatients undergoing HSCT. Effects are most strongly seen at >75% daily CHG usage. There were no adverse effects due to CHG application. The significant decrease in MBI-LCBI with topical CHG suggests an interaction between the skin microbial environment and enteric organisms. Therefore, further research exploring the effects of CHG on the skin and gut microbiota is warranted. Disclosures Gasparetto: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Horwitz:Abbvie Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rizzieri:Celgene, Gilead, Seattle Genetics, Stemline: Other: Speaker; AbbVie, Agios, AROG, Bayer, Celgene, Gilead, Jazz, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Stemline, Teva: Other: Advisory Board; AROG, Bayer, Celgene, Celltron, Mustang, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Stemline: Consultancy; Stemline: Research Funding. Sung:Novartis: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Seres: Research Funding.

Management of Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections (MBI-LCBIs) in Stem Cell Transplant Recipients: A National Survey of Cancer Centers Practices

Background Patients with hematologic malignancies receiving chemotherapy and those undergoing stem cell transplantation (SCT) are at risk for mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections (MBI-LCBIs). Our comprehensive cancer center, which performs over 300 SCTs per year, has historically removed central venous catheters (CVCs) for the majority of transient MBI- LCBI cases in SCT recipients. However, given the lack of evidence-based guidelines for removal or salvage, we created a national survey to gauge current clinical practice of MBI-LCBI and CVC management among U.S. cancer centers. Methods We created a 22-item online anonymous survey via Qualtrics software. The survey was performed in August and September of 2018 and open for a total of 30 days. The questionnaire consisted of three parts: respondents' characteristics, MBI-LCBI and CVC clinical practice questions, and two clinical vignettes. In parallel, a quality improvement project is ongoing to evaluate outcomes following catheter salvage versus removal in MBI-LCBI cases of SCT recipients. Results The survey was distributed to seventy Infectious Diseases consultants at cancer centers in the United States. The response rate was 44%. 70% of respondents had > 5 years of clinical experience. The majority (75%) responded that MBI-LCBI does not implicate the CVC as the source of bacteremia. 61% of respondents salvage CVCs in SCT patients unless contraindicated. In patients with salvaged CVCs, 37.5% of responders do not use adjunct lock therapy and 46% deem repeat end of therapy surveillance blood culture as unnecessary. 62.5% of responders do not routinely recommend other procedures such as venous duplex ultrasound and transthoracic echocardiogram for MBI-LCBI cases unless clinically indicated. Among 90% of respondents deemed fluoroquinolone step down oral therapy for susceptible Enterobacteriaceae MBI-LCBI as acceptable. Conclusion Management of MBI-LCBIs in hematologic malignancies and SCT patients is variable but CVC salvage is considered by a majority of survey respondents as a safe approach. Data comparing outcomes of catheter salvage strategies are lacking. Results of our ongoing quality improvement project will provide further guidance.

Burden and Outcomes of Mucosal Barrier Injury-Laboratory Confirmed Bloodstream Infections (MBI-LCBI) in the First 100 Days after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant: A CIBMTR Analysis

Background: Patients undergoing stem cell transplant (SCT) are at risk of bloodstream infections (BSI). BSI led to prolonged hospitalization, intensive care admissions, prolonged antibiotic treatment and increased mortality. Recently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed a modification of the Central line associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) definition, termed “mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection” (MBI-LCBI) to differentiate BSI likely related to mucosal barrier injury. BSI are identified as an MBI-LCBI if: (1) it resulted from 1 or more of a group of selected organisms known to be commensals of the oral cavity or gastrointestinal tract and (2) occurred in a patient with signs or symptoms compatible with the presence of mucosal barrier injury such as gastrointestinal graft-versus-host disease and/or neutropenia. We utilized the CIBMTR database to determine the incidence and timing of MBI-LCBI, risk factors for development of MBI-LCBI, and compare transplant outcomes by 1 year after SCT.Methods: We identified 16,875 pediatric and adult patients receiving first allogeneic transplant from 2009-2016. Patients were classified into 4 categories based on the occurrence of BSI in first 100 days: MBI-LCBI (n=1434; 8.5%), MBI-LCBI +other BSI (n=700; 4.1%), BSI only (n=3016; 17.8%), and control (n=11725; 69.5%) (Figure 1). Demographics and outcomes, including overall survival (OS), chronic GVHD, and transplant-related mortality (TRM, for malignant disease patients only), were compared between groups.Results: The cumulative incidence of MBI-LCBI was 13% (99% CI: 12-13%) by day 100 whereas the probability for another BSI not meeting MBI-LCBI criteria was 22% (99% CI: 21-23%) by day 100. The median time from transplant to first MBI-LCBI was 8 days (<1-98), MBI-LCBI + other BSI 10 days (<1-99), and other BSI was 38 days (<1-100). Karnofsky/Lansky performance status <90 [RR 1.21 (99% CI: 1.06 - 1.38)], myeloablative conditioning [RR 1.45 (99% CI: 1.27-1.69)], post-transplant cyclophosphamide as GVHD prophylaxis [RR 1.83 (99% CI: 1.40 - 2.39)], and receipt of cord blood [RR 2.89 (99% CI: 2.06 - 4.06)] were associated with a significant increase in the risk of MBI-LCBI (Table 1). The 1 year OS was inferior for patients with MBI-LCBI only [59% (99% CI: 56 - 61%); RR 1.86 (99% CI: 1.65 - 2.09)], Other BSI only [60% (99% CI: 58 - 63%); RR 1.86 (99% CI: 1.70 - 2.04)], and MBI-LCBI + Other BSI [46% (99% CI: 41 - 50%); RR 2.79 (99% CI: 2.42 - 3.23)] compared to controls [72% (71 - 73); p <0.0001] (Table 2). There was no impact of MBI-LCBI only, Other BSI only, or MBI-LCBI + Other BSI compared to controls on development of chronic GVHD. As expected 1 year TRM in patients with malignant disease was increased with any BSI but was similar for patients with MBI-LCBI only [30% (99% CI: 27 - 34%); RR 2.41 (99% CI: 2.05-2.82] or Other BSI [25% (99% CI: 23 - 27%); RR 2.20 (1.94 - 2.51)] and further worsened for patients with both MBI-LCBI + Other BSI [45% (99% CI: 39 - 50%); RR 4.23 (3.53 - 5.07)] compared to controls [16% (99% CI:15 - 17%)]. Finally, infection as a cause of mortality was higher in patients with MBI-LCBI (19%), BSI only (17%), and MBI-LCBI + BSI (21%) then controls (12%).Discussion: Our data demonstrate approximately 13% of all patients develop at least one MBI-LCBI and an additional 22% of patients develop another BSI in the first 100 days post SCT. Multivariable analysis revealed increased risk of MBI-LCBI with poor performance status, cord blood grafts, myeloablative conditioning, and post-transplant cyclophosphamide GVHD prophylaxis. BSI, whether or not MBI-LCBI, significantly decreases overall survival, primarily related to an increased TRM. The combination of MBI-LCBI and other BSI worsens both TRM and OS, but the respective impact of MBI-LCBI only was similar to Other BSI only. BSI, both MBI-LCBIs and other BSI, lead to significant morbidity and mortality and healthcare resource utilization. Reduction in frequency of BSI should be a major public health and scientific priority. [Display omitted] DisclosuresPerales:Novartis: Other: Personal fees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees and Clinical trial support; Abbvie: Other: Personal fees; Takeda: Other: Personal fees; Merck: Other: Personal fees.

COC-69 - Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections and Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections: Results from a Quality-Improvement Project in a Hematology-Oncology Unit

COC-69 - Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections and Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections: Results from a Quality-Improvement Project in a Hematology-Oncology Unit

Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory Confirmed Bloodstream Infections

To increase the awareness of the new CDC survey definition of Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infection (MBI-LCBI). We included a comparison of the definition of Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection (CLABSI), with a high sensitivity but low specificity and Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection (CRBSI). There are other parameters like the difference between the size of the inoculum (catheter lumen vs peripheral), that increased specificity and is useful for research and clinical decisions. Also, MBI-LCBI secondary to bacterial translocation in patients who had received myeloablative chemotherapy with severe neutropenia is not related to central venous catheter care. This new survey definition is useful for better classification of nosocomial bloodstream infections among patients receiving myeloablative chemotherapy and has impacted diminishing the incidence of CLABSI, which has probably has been overestimated in patients with hematological malignancies. The concept of MBI-LCBI should not be limited to survey purposes; it is also useful for clinical decisions. We propose to incorporate a second set of blood cultures obtained 48 hours after antibiotic treatment onset, one through the line of the CVC and another one at a peripheral site; if negative, it avoids unnecessary removal of the catheter in patients with severe neutropenia or, on the contrary, if positive blood cultures persist after 48 hours of antimicrobial therapy, there is a clear indication for central venous catheter removal. The definition of MBI-LCBI avoids over-diagnosis of CLABSI in patients receiving myeloablative chemotherapy with severe neutropenia.

Two-Year Hospital-Wide Surveillance of Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections in a Korean Hospital.

BackgroundSurveillance and interventions of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) had mainly been targeted in intensive care units (ICUs). Central lines are increasingly used outside ICUs. Therefore, we performed a hospital-wide survey of CLABSIs to evaluate the current status and develop strategies to reduce CLBASI rates.MethodsAll hospitalized patients with central venous catheters (CVCs) were screened for CLABSIs from January 2014 through December 2015 at a 1,328 bed tertiary care teaching hospital in Korea using an electronic data-collecting system. Clinical information including type of CVC was collected. CLABSI rates were calculated using the definitions of the National Health and Safety Network after excluding mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (BSI).ResultsA total of 154 CLABSIs were identified, of which 72 (46.8%) occurred in general wards and 82 (53.2%) in ICUs (0.81 and 2.71 per 1,000 catheter days), respectively. Non-tunneled CVCs were most common (68.6%) among 70 CLABSI events diagnosed within one week of their maintenance. On the other hand, tunneled CVCs and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) were more common (60.5%) among 114 CLABSI events diagnosed more than a week after maintenance. Whereas the majority (72.2%) of CLABSIs in ICUs were associated with non-tunneled CVCs, tunneled CVCs (38.9%) and PICCs (36.8%) were more common in general wards.ConclusionCLABSIs are less common in general wards than in ICUs, but they are more often associated with long-term indwelling catheters. Therefore, interventions to prevent CLABSIs should be tailored according to the type of ward and type of catheter.

Impact of mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI) on central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in department of hematology at single university hospital in Japan.

Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) are among the most serious complications especially in blood cancer patients. In January 2013, Centers for Disease and Prevention (CDC) introduced a new surveillance definition of mucosal barrier injury-associated laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI). This study was to determine the impact of MBI-LCBI on CLABSIs and compare the clinical characteristics of MBI versus non-MBI-LCBI cases. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 250 consecutive patients. They were admitted in department of hematology at Aichi Medical University Hospital. We applied the revised 2013 CLABSI surveillance protocol to all CLABSI cases identified during the 47-months period from May 2012 through June 2016. A total of 44 CLABSIs were identified. The median patient age was 65 years (range, 12 to 89). Among 44 patients, 31 patients were diagnosed as leukemia (70.5%) and 12 patients as lymphoma (27.3%). Six patients underwent bone transplantation for leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (13.6%). A total of 20 patients (45.5%) were classified as MBI-LCBI and 24 (54.5%) were classified as non-MBI-LCBI. The primary disease type (P=0.018), neutropenic within 3 days before CLABSI (MBI-LCBI vs. non-MBI-LCBI: 95.0% vs. 26.3%, P=<0.0001), line(s) removed owing to CLABSI (15.0% vs. 54.2%, P=0.011) and Gram-negative organisms cultured (70.0% vs. 37.5%, P=0.004) showed significantly difference between the groups. Our data showed that MBI-LCBI cases account for 45.5% of the CLABSI cases identified in blood cancer patients, and constituted a significant burden to this high-risk patient population.

Epidemiology and Burden of Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections in Bone Marrow Transplant and Hematology-Oncology Units

Epidemiology and Burden of Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections in Bone Marrow Transplant and Hematology-Oncology Units

The role of a surveillance programme for intro-ducing peripherally inserted central catheters: a 2-year observational study in an academic hospital.

In our hospital, a previous attempt to introduce peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) was aborted after a nonsystematic approach, seemingly accompanied by high rates of complications. The goal of this new interdisciplinary project was to introduce PICCs in an academic hospital, with an embedded interdisciplinary surveillance programme for both infectious and noninfectious outcomes. We prospectively collected data for this surveillance study from all patients who underwent PICC insertion from 1 January 2014 and had the catheter removed by 31 December 2015 in our 950-bed academic hospital (Bern University Hospital, Switzerland). Infectious complications were defined according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention / National Healthcare Safety Network criteria. PICCs were restricted to cancer and infectious disease patients, and were followed up irrespective of the management setting (inpatient, outpatient or intermittently hospitalised after insertion). An interdisciplinary team reviewed the outcomes on a routine basis and discussed changes to the process to improve outcomes, if necessary. One hundred and thirty-five PICCs were inserted in 124 patients, the majority of whom were patients from the medical oncology department (n = 107, 86.3%). Indications for PICC insertion included: chemotherapy (n = 97, 71.9%), antibiotic therapy (n = 24, 17.8%), total parenteral nutrition (n = 8, 5.9%), blood product transfusion (n = 4, 3.0%) and palliative care (n = 2, 1.5%). During a total of 10 402 catheter-days (median dwell time 62 days), there were five central line-associated bloodstream infections, including one mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection and two exit-site infections, yielding incidence rates of 0.48 and 0.19 infections per 1000 catheter-days, respectively. Incidence rates were 0.67 per 1000 catheter-days (n = 7) for radiologically documented deep venous thrombosis, 0.96 (n = 10) for tip dislocation and 0.67 (n = 7) for catheter occlusion. The overall rate of complications was 4.5 per 1000 catheter-days. Seventeen catheters (12.6%) were removed because of any complication. We successfully introduced PICCs in an academic hospital by implementing a systematic surveillance programme for complications. Both infectious and noninfectious complications were rare. Infection prevention specialists should be actively involved during the introduction of new intravascular devices in order to provide quality indicators and assure patient safety.

Impact of removing mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections from central line-associated bloodstream infection rates in the National Healthcare Safety Network, 2014.

Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) event data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network from 2014, the first year of required use of the mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (MBI-LCBI) definition, were analyzed to assess the impact of removing MBI-LCBI events from CLABSI rates. CLABSI rates decreased significantly in some location types after removing MBI-LCBI events, and MBI-LCBI events will be removed from publicly reported CLABSI rates.

Healthcare Burden, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections after Stem Cell Transplantation

Mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections (MBI-LCBIs) lead to significant morbidity, mortality, and healthcare resource utilization in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients. Determination of the healthcare burden of MBI-LCBIs and identification of patients at risk of MBI-LCBIs will allow researchers to identify strategies to reduce MBI-LCBI rates. The objective of our study was to describe the incidence, risk factors, timing, and outcomes of MBI-LCBIs in hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of 374 patients who underwent HSCT at a large free-standing academic children's hospital to determine the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of patients that developed a bloodstream infection (BSI) including MBI-LCBI, central line–associated BSI (CLABSI), or secondary BSI in the first year after HSCT. Outcome measures included nonrelapse mortality (NRM), central venous catheter removal within 7 days of positive culture, shock, admission to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) within 48 hours of positive culture, and death within 10 days of positive culture. One hundred seventy BSIs were diagnosed in 100 patients (27%): 80 (47%) MBI-LCBIs, 68 (40%) CLABSIs, and 22 (13%) secondary infections. MBI-LCBIs were diagnosed at a significantly higher rate in allogeneic HSCT patients (18% versus 7%, P = .007). Reduced-intensity conditioning (OR, 1.96; P = .015) and transplant-associated thrombotic microangiopathy (OR, 2.94; P = .0004) were associated with MBI-LCBI. Nearly 50% of all patients with a BSI developed septic shock, 10% died within 10 days of positive culture, and nearly 25% were transferred to the PICU. One-year NRM was significantly increased in patients with 1 (34%) and more than 1 (56%) BSIs in the first year post-HSCT compared with those who did not develop BSIs (14%) (P ≤ .0001). There was increased 1-year NRM in patients with at least 1 MBI-LCBI (OR, 1.94; P = .018) and at least 1 secondary BSI (OR, 2.87; P = .0023) but not CLABSIs (OR, 1.17; P = .68). Our data demonstrate that MBI-LCBIs lead to substantial use of healthcare resources and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Reduction in frequency of MBI-LCBI should be a major public health and scientific priority.

Mucosal Barrier Injury Laboratory-Confirmed Bloodstream Infections (MBI-LCBI): Descriptive Analysis of Data Reported to National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN), 2013.

OBJECTIVES To determine the impact of mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections (MBI-LCBIs) on central-line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates during the first year of MBI-LCBI reporting to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) DESIGN Descriptive analysis of 2013 NHSN data SETTING Selected inpatient locations in acute care hospitals METHODS A descriptive analysis of MBI-LCBI cases was performed. CLABSI rates per 1,000 central-line days were calculated with and without the inclusion of MBI-LCBIs in the subset of locations reporting ≥1 MBI-LCBI, and in all locations (regardless of MBI-LCBI reporting) to determine rate differences overall and by location type. RESULTS From 418 locations in 252 acute care hospitals reporting ≥1 MBI-LCBIs, 3,162 CLABSIs were reported; 1,415 (44.7%) met the MBI-LCBI definition. Among these locations, removing MBI-LCBI from the CLABSI rate determination produced the greatest CLABSI rate decreases in oncology (49%) and ward locations (45%). Among all locations reporting CLABSI data, including those reporting no MBI-LCBIs, removing MBI-LCBI reduced rates by 8%. Here, the greatest decrease was in oncology locations (38% decrease); decreases in other locations ranged from 1.2% to 4.2%. CONCLUSIONS An understanding of the potential impact of removing MBI-LCBIs from CLABSI data is needed to accurately interpret CLABSI trends over time and to inform changes to state and federal reporting programs. Whereas the MBI-LCBI definition may have a large impact on CLABSI rates in locations where patients with certain clinical conditions are cared for, the impact of MBI-LCBIs on overall CLABSI rates across inpatient locations appears to be more modest. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2015;37(1):2-7.