Definition and clinical management of haemodialysis central venous catheter local infections (exit site and tunnel infection): An international consensus assessment

Abstract

[eng] Aim: To evaluate the relevance of signs and symptoms for the clinical identification of ESI and TI in HD-CVC, by means of international expert consensus, and to reach a consensus on a definition and clinical management (CM) for these infections. Background: A recent systematic review showed a high heterogeneity in the signs/ symptoms used for determining exit site infection (ESI) and tunnel infection (TI) of haemodialysis central venous catheter (HD-CVC). Design: A modified Delphi ranking process was carried out between November 2020 and March 2021, consisting of four rounds using an online questionnaire with a panel of 26 experts from 12 countries. Methods: Experts responded on the level of relevance for the identification of ESI and TI, based on a list of 22 signs/symptoms obtained from a previous systematic review, using a 4-point Likert-type scale. After reaching consensus on the signs/symptoms, they followed the same method to reach consensus on the CM. The STROBE Checklist was used to report this study. Results: A high degree of consensus was reached to identify the presence of ESI based on nine signs/symptoms: presence of pain at the exit site (ES) during interdialysis period, with fever ≥38°C do not suspect other cause, local signs at the ES (inflammation, induration, swelling, hyperemia/erythema ≥2 cm from ES) and obvious abscess or purulent exudate at ES; and of TI. Likewise, 5 cm were agreed upon. Conclusion: This Delphi study provides international expert consensus definitions of ESI and TI in HD-CVC, laying the groundwork for the validation of an HD-CVC ES clinical assessment scale for early identification of ESI. Relevance to Clinical Practice: In addition, this study provides a series of attitudes to consensual clinics regarding signs/symptoms of local infections in HD-CVC, which may be useful as expert opinion in clinical practice guidelines, when there is insufficient scientific evidence.