Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39218889›Full record

Trial reportAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2024

Efficacy and safety of preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infection by inhibiting catheter bacterial biofilm formation: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Wei He, Peifen Ma, Lu Li, Dongmin Wang, Xin Li, Xingqiao Wen, Yi Zuo, Qin Guo, Yanhong Zhang, Ru Cheng and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Wei He *Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science & Technology, Wuhan, China.
Peifen Ma *Lanzhou University Second Hospital, No. 82, Cuiyingmen, Chengguan District, Lanzhou, 730030, People's Republic of China.
Lu Li *Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science & Technology, Wuhan, China.
Dongmin Wang *Lanzhou University Second Hospital, No. 82, Cuiyingmen, Chengguan District, Lanzhou, 730030, People's Republic of China.
Xin LiBeijing Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xingqiao WenThe Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Yi ZuoNanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Qin GuoNanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Yanhong ZhangNanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Ru ChengInstitute of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Zhiping WangLanzhou University Second Hospital, No. 82, Cuiyingmen, Chengguan District, Lanzhou, 730030, People's Republic of China. eryw_zp@126.com.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 31072238, 31172441, 31372562, 81170650
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCatheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) remains the most significant challenge among hospital-acquired infections (HAIs), yet still unresolved. The present study aims to evaluate the preventive effectiveness of JUC Spray Dressing (name of U.S. FDA and CE certifications, while the medical device name in China is Long-acting Antimicrobial Material) alone for CAUTI without combining with antibiotics and to evaluate the impact of bacterial biofilm formation on CAUTI results on the inserted catheters of patients.

methodsIn this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, we enrolled adults who suffered from acute urinary retention (AUR) and required catheterization in 6 hospitals in China. Participants were randomly allocated 1:1 according to a random number table to receive JUC Spray Dressing (JUC group) or normal saline (placebo group). The catheters were pretreated with JUC Spray Dressing or normal saline respectively before catheterization. Urine samples and catheter samples were collected after catheterization by trial staff for further investigation.

resultsFrom April 2012 to April 2020, we enrolled 264 patients and randomly assigned them to the JUC group (n = 132) and the placebo group (n = 132). Clinical symptoms and urine bacterial cultures showed the incidence of CAUTI of the JUC group was significantly lower than the placebo group (P < 0.01). In addition, another 30 patients were enrolled to evaluate the biofilm formation on catheters after catheter insertion in the patients' urethra (10 groups, 3 each). The results of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) showed that bacterial biofilm formed on the 5th day in the placebo group, while no bacterial biofilm formed on the 5th day in the JUC group. In addition, no adverse reactions were reported using JUC Spray Dressing.

conclusionContinued indwelling urinary catheters for 5 days resulted in bacterial biofilm formation, and pretreatment of urethral catheters with JUC Spray Dressing can prevent bacterial biofilm formation by forming a physical antimicrobial film, and significantly reduce the incidence of CAUTI. This is the first report of a study on inhibiting bacterial biofilm formation on the catheters in CAUTI patients.

Indexed as

BiofilmsCatheter-Related InfectionsUrinary Tract InfectionsAdultAgedBandagesChinaCross InfectionDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedUrinary CatheterizationUrinary CathetersBacterial biofilm on patient cathetersCathetersHospital-acquired infectionsPhysical antimicrobial filmUrinary tract infection

Identifiers

PMID39218889
PMCPMC11367937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.