Comparison of rates of infection of two methods of emergency ventricular drainage

两种紧急脑室引流方法感染率的比较

阅读:1

Abstract

The rates of infection of two methods of external ventricular drainage in use at Atkinson Morley's Hospital--namely, (a) percutaneous drainage with Rickham reservoirs and (b) tunnelled ventriculostomies--were compared in this retrospective review. Percutaneous drainage of CSF with Rickham reservoirs was associated with a 27% rate of infection as identified by positive microbiological cultures; tunnelled ventriculostomy catheters had a 10% infection rate. The difference in the infection rate between the two methods was statistically significant (P < 0.015). Other variables examined, including the age and sex of the patients and the reasons for ventricular drainage, were not associated with an increased rate of infection. Most infections from either method were caused by a coagulase negative staphylococcus. The average duration of ventricular drainage before identification of positive cultures was 5.7 days for Rickham reservoirs and 6.0 days for ventriculostomies.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。