ArticleAnnals of burns and fire disasters2025
Investigation of the effects of types of catheters on bloodstream infection in patients with major burns: prognosis and prediction using procalcitonin.
Article in Annals of burns and fire disasters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bloodstream and catheter-related infections frequently occur in patients with burns. Thus, it is important to correctly assess and manage them. This study aimed to investigate the effects of catheter types used in patients with major burns on bloodstream infections and to predict sepsis status and manage its prognosis using a procalcitonin biomarker. The study included 34 patients who were admitted to the burn intensive care unit. These patients were classified into two groups based on whether they used peripheral or central venous catheter. The procalcitonin, thrombocyte and leukocyte levels of the patients were assessed every other day for 4 weeks, starting from the day when they were admitted to the burn center. An intergroup comparison revealed that procalcitonin levels were lower in the peripheral catheter group than in the central venous catheter group after day 10. Furthermore, the procalcitonin levels were significantly lower in the peripheral catheter group than in the central venous catheter group, especially on days 19, 21 and 24 (p <0.05). It is important to consider using peripheral venous catheters instead of central venous catheters in patients with major burns in order to mitigate the risk of catheter-related infections. Monitoring patients based on procalcitonin levels every other day, changing catheters, and administering antibiotic therapy based on changes in procalcitonin levels in patients likely to have elevated procalcitonin levels may reduce unnecessary antibiotic exposure and associated costs to the healthcare system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40416898PMC12097493What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.