Vascular Catheter-Associated Infections: A Microbiological and Therapeutic Update

References

• Ruesch S, Walder B, Tramer MR. Complications of cen-tral venous catheters: internal jugular versus subclavian access-a systematic review. Crit Care Med. 2002; 30 (2): 454–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. MMWR 2002; 51: (n.RR-10): 1–28.
   Google Scholar
• Mermel LA., Farr BM., Sherertz RJ et al. Guidelines for the management of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32: 1249-1272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Grady NP, Alexander M, Dellinger EP, et al, Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2002; 23: 759–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevenson KB, Adcox MJ, MaIlea MC, Narasimhan N, Wagnild JP. Standardized surveillance of hemodialysis vascular access infections: 18-month experience at an outpatient, mul-tifacility hemodialysis center. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2000; 21 (3): 200–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moro ML, Vigano EF, Cozzi Lepri A. Risk factors for central venous catheter-related infections in surgical and inten-sive care units. The Central Venous Catheter-Related Infections Study Group. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1994; 15 (4 Pt 1): 253-64.
   Google Scholar
• Eggimann P, Pittet D.Overview of catheter-related infec-tions with special emphasis on prevention based on education-al programs. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2002; 8 (5): 295–309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deshpande KS, Hatem C, Ulrich HL et al. The inci-dence of infectious complications of central venous catheters at the subclavian, internal jugular, and femoral sites in an intensive care unit population. Crit Care Med 2005; 33: 13–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor G, Gravel D, Johnston L, et al. Incidence of bloodstream infection in multicenter inception cohorts of hemodialysis patients. Am J Infect Contr 2004; 32: 155–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rayner HC, Pisoni RL, Sommer J, et al. Mortality and hospitalization in haemodialysis patients in five European countries: results from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). Nephrol Dial Transplant 2004; 19: 108–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• an Rooden CJ, Schippers EF, Barge RM et al. Infectious complications of central venous catheters increase the risk of catheter-related thrombosis in hematology patients: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 2655-60.
   Google Scholar
• Petrosillo N, Viale P, Nicastri E et al. Nosocomial bloodstream infections among human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients: incidence and risk factors. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34: 677–85.
   Google Scholar
• McGregor AR, Collignon PJ. Bacteraemia and fun-gaemia in an Australian general hospital - associations and outcomes. Med J Aust 1993; 158: 671–674.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ippolito G, Nicastri E, Martini L, Petrosillo N. Hospital infection control in Italy. Infection 2003; 31 suppl 2: 4-9.
   Google Scholar
• Gastmeier P, Sohr D, Geffers C et al. Mortality risk factors with nosocomial Staphylococcus aureus infections in Intensive Care Units: results from the German Nosocomial Infection Surveillance System (KISS). Infection 2005; 33: 50–55.
   Google Scholar
• Donelli G, De Paoli P, Fadda G et al for the CVC study group. A multicenter study on central venous catheter-associ-ated infections in Italy. J Chemother 2001; 13: 251–262.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson M, Frykberg L, Flock JI, Pei L, Lindberg M, Guss B. A fibrinogen-binding protein of Staphylococcus epi-dermidis. Infect Immun 1998; 66 (6): 2666–2673
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heilman C, Mussain M, Peters G, Gotz F. Evidence for autolysin-mediated primary attachment of Staphylococcus epi- dermidis to a polystyrene surface. Mol Microbiol 1997; 147: 2545–2552
   Google Scholar
• Raad I. Intravascular catheter-related infections. Lancet 1998; 351: 893–898.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams RJ, Henderson B, Sharp LJ, Nair SP. Identification of a fibronectin-binding protein from Staphylococcus epidermidis. Infect Immun 2002; 70: 6805–6810.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vuong C, Otto M. Staphylococcus epidermidis infec-tions. Microbes Infect 2002; 4: 481–489.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stefani S, Varaldo PE. Epidemiology of methicillin resis-tant staphylococci in Europe. Clin Microbiol Inf 2003; 9: 1179–1186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cafiso V, Bertuccio T, Santagati M et al. Presence of the ica operon in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus epider-midis and its role in biofilm production. Clin Microbiol Inf 2004; 10: 1081–1088.
   Google Scholar
• De Silva GDI, Kantzanou M, Massey RC et al. The ica operon and biofilm production in coagulase-negative staphylo-cocci associated with carriage and disease in a neonatal inten-sive care unit. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40: 382–388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System report, data summary from January 1990-May 1999, issued June 1999. Am J Infect Control 1999; 27 (6): 520–532.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donlan RM, Costerton JW. Biofilms: survival mecha-nisms of clinical relevant microrganisms. Clin Microbiol Rev 2002; 15: 167–193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarwood JM, Bartels DJ, Volper EM, Greenberg EP. Quorum sensing in Staphylococcus aureus biofilms. J Bacteriol 2004; 186: 1838–1850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cafiso V, Bertuccio T, Campanile F et al. Biofilm pro-duction and correlation with agr-allele distribution in medical-devices associated with Staphylococcus aureus. ISSSI abstract BF-10, Charleston, North Carolina USA. October 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Costerton JW. Overview of microbial biofilms. J Ind Microbiol. 1995; 15: 137–140.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Greenberg EP. Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science 1999; 284: 1318–1322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seifert H. Catheter-related infections due to gram-nega-tive bacilli. In: Seifert H, Jansen B, Farr BM, Eds. Catheter-related infections. New York: Marcel Dekker 1997; 111-138.
   Google Scholar
• Pillai SK, Sakoulas G, Eliopoulos GM. Effects of glucose on fsr-mediated biofilm formation in Enterococcus faecalis. J Infect Dis 2004; 190 (5): 967–970.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherertz RJ. Pathogenesis of vascular catheter infec-tions. In: Waldvogel FA, Bisno AL, eds. Infections associated with indwelling medical devices. Washington:ASM Press; 2000: 111-125.
   Google Scholar
• Raad I, Costerton W, Sabharwal U et al. Ultrastructural analysis of indwelling vascular catheters: a quantitative rela-tionship between luminal colonization and duration of place-ment. J Infect Dis 1993; 168: 400–407.
   Google Scholar
• Sherertz RJ, Raad II, Belani A et al. Three year experi-ence with sonicated vascular catheter cultures in a clinical microbiology laboratory. J Clin Microbiol 1990; 28: 76–82.
   Google Scholar
• Gotz F. Staphylococcus and biofilm. Mol Microbiol 2002; 43: 1367–1378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunne WM, Mason EO, Kaplan SL. Diffusion of rifampin and vancomycin through a Staphylococcus epider-midis biofilm. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 2522–2526.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanley NR, Britton RA, Grossman AD, Lazazzera BE. Identification of catabolite repression as a physiological regula-tor of biofilm formation by Bacillus subtilis by use of DNA microarrays. J. Bacterial 2003; 185: 1951–1957
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mah TF, O'Toole GA. Mechanism of biofilm resistance to antimicrobial agents. Trends Microbiol 2001; 9: 34–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schembri MA, Kjaergaard K, Klemm P. Global gene expression in Escherichia coli biofilms. Mol Microbiol. 2003; 48 (1): 253–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• mah TF, Pitts B, Pellock B et al. A genetic basis for Pseudomona aeruginosa biofilm antibiotic resistance. Nature 2003; 426: 306-310.
   Google Scholar
• Stefani S, Pini B, Mezzatesta M et al. Italian Nationwide survey: Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases in iso-lates of Enterobacteriaceae from inpatients and outpatients. 44th ICAAC, Washington, DC, 2004: abstr. 138.
   Google Scholar
• Stefani S. Emergence of multi-drug resistance gram-positive bacteria and new active antibiotics. Current Med Chem - Anti-infective Agents 2005; 4 (3): 235–257.
   Google Scholar
• EARSS Annual Report 2001 - Bilthoven, The Netherlands, July 2002, 27.
   Google Scholar
• Stefani S, Mezzatesta ML, Tempera G et al. Comparative activity of linezolid against staphylococci and enterococci isolated in Italy. Clin Microbiol Inf 2002; 8: 368–372.
   Google Scholar
• VISA/VRSA - Fact sheet - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - USA.
   Google Scholar
• NNI5 report - CDC Atlanta USA.
   Google Scholar
• von Eiff C, Heilmann C, Peters G. New aspects in the molecular basis of polymer-associated infections due to staphy-lococci. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1999; 18: 843–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morales M, Mendez-Alvarez S, Martin-Lopez JV, Marrero C, Freytes CO. Biofilm: the microbial “bunker” for intravascular catheter-related infection. Support Care Cancer. 2004; 12: 701–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szomolay B, Klapper I, Dockery J, Stewart PS. Adaptive responses to antimicrobial agents in biofilms. Environ Microbiol. 2005; 7: 1186–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fux CA, Stoodley P, Hall-Stoodley L, Costerton JW. Bacterial biofilms: a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2003; 1: 667–83.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Souza E, Burillo A, Munoz P. Catheter-related infec-tions: diagnosis and intravascular treatment. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002; 8: 265–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blot F, Nitenberg G, Chachaty E et al. Diagnosis of catheter related bacteraemia: a prospective comparison of the time to positivity of hub-blood versus peripheral-blood cultures. Lancet 1999; 354: 1071–1077.
   Google Scholar
• Raad I, Hanna HA, Alakech B, et al. Differential time to positivity: a useful method for diagnosing catheter-related bloodstream infections. Ann Intern Med. 2004; 140: 18-25. Catton JA, Dobbins BM, Kite P et al. In situ diagnosis of intravascular catheter-related bloodstream infection: a com-parison of quantitative culture, differential time to positivity, and endoluminal brushing. Crit Care Med. 2005; 33: 787–91.
   Google Scholar
• Ceri H, Olson ME, Stremick C, et al. The Calgary Biofilm Device: new technology for rapid determination of antibiotic susceptibilities of bacterial biofilms. J Clin Microbiol 1999; 37: 1771–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaillard JL, Merlino R, Pajot N et al. Conventional and nonconventional modes of vancomycin administration to decontaminate the internal surface of catheters colonized with coagulase-negative staphylococci. J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1990; 14: 593–597.
   Google Scholar
• Guggenbichler JP, Berchtold D, Allerberger FR et al. In vitro and in vivo effect of antibiotics on catheters colonized by staphylococci. Eur J Microbiol Infect Dis 1992; 11: 408–415.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Arellano ER, Pascual A, Martinez-Martinez L et al. Activity of eight antibacterial agents on Staphylococcus epi-dermidis attached to Teflon catheters. J Med Microbiol 1994; 40: 43–47.
   Google Scholar
• Kropec A, Huebner J, Wursthorn M et al. In vitro activ-ity of vancomycin and teicoplanin against Staphylococcus epi-dermidis colonizing catheters. Eur J Microbiol Infect Dis 1993; 12: 545–548.
   Google Scholar
• Pascual A, de Arellano ER, Martinez-Martinez L et al. Effect of polyurethane catheters and bacterial biofilms on the in-vitro activity of antimicrobials against Staphylococcus epi-dermidis. J Hosp Infect 1993; 24: 211–218.
   Google Scholar
• Williams N, Carlson GL, Scott NA, Irving MH. Incidence and management of catheter-related sepsis in patients receiving home parenteral nutrition. Br J Surg 1994; 81: 392–394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benoit JL, Carandang G, Sitrin M, et al. Intraluminal antibiotic treatment of central venous catheter infections in patients receiving parenteral nutrition at home. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 21: 1286–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messing - B,Peitra-Cohen S, Debure A, et al. Antibiotic-lock technique: a new approach to optimal therapy for catheter-related infections. Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1988; 12: 185-9.
   Google Scholar
• Kentos A, Struelens MJ, Thys JP. Antibiotic-lock tech-nique for the treatment of central venous catheter infections. Clin Infect Dis 1996; 23: 418–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiz-Valverde MP, Barbera JR, Segarra A, et al. Successful treatment of catheter-related sepsis and extralumi-nal catheter thrombosis with vancomycin and fraxiparin with-out removal. Nephron 1997; 75: 354–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capdevila JA, Segarra A, Planes AM, et al. Successful treatment of haemodialysis catheter-related sepsis without catheter removal. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1993; 8: 231–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krishnasami Z, Carlton D, Bimbo L, et al. Management of hemodialysis catheter-related bacteremia with an adjunctive antibiotic lock solution. Kidney Int 2002; 61: 1136–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krzywda EA, Andris DA, Edmiston CE, et al. Treatment of Hickman catheter sepsis using antibiotic lock technique. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1995; 16: 596–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Sio L, Jenkner A, Milano GM, et al. Antibiotic lock with vancomycin and urokinase can successfully treat colo-nized central venous catheters in pediatric cancer patients. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2004; 23: 963–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Segarra-Newnham M, Martin-Cooper EM. Antibiotic lock technique: a review of the literature. Ann Pharmacother. 2005; 39: 311–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rijnders BJ, Van Wijngaerden E, Vandecasteele SJ, Stas M, Peetermans WE. Treatment of long-term intravascular catheter-related bacteraemia with antibiotic lock: randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005; 55: 90–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viale P, Pagani L, Petrosillo N et al. Antibiotic lock-technique for the treatment of catheter-related bloodstream infections. J Chemother. 2003; 15: 152–6.
   Google Scholar
• Berrington A, Gould FK. Use of antibiotic locks to treat colonized central venous catheters. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001; 48: 597–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bestul MB, Vandenbussche HL. Antibiotic lock tech-nique: review of the literature. Pharmacotherapy 2005; 25: 211–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah CB, Mittelman MW, Costerton JW et al. Antimicrobial activity of a novel catheter lock solution. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002; 46: 1674–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koldehoff M, Zakrzewski JL. Taurolidine is effective in the treatment of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections in cancer patients. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2004; 24: 491–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jurewitsch B, Jeejeebhoy KN. Taurolidine lock: the key to prevention of recurrent catheter-related bloodstream infec-tions. Clin Nutr. 2005; 24: 462–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dannenberg C, Bierbach U, Rothe A, Beer J, Korholz D. Ethanol-lock technique in the treatment of J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2003; 25: 616-21.
   Google Scholar
• Kollef MH. Optimizing antibiotic therapy in the inten-sive care unit setting. Crit Care 2001; 5: 189–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lodise TP, McKinnon PS, Swiderski L, et al. Outcomes analysis of delayed antibiotic treatment for hospital-acquired Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 36: 1418–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munoz P, Bouza E, San Juan R, et al. Clinical-epidemi-ological characteristics and outcome of patients with catheter-related bloodstream infections in Europe (ESGNI-006 Study). Clin Microbiol Infect. 2004; 10: 843–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosoglu S, Akalin S, Kidir V, et al. Prospective surveil-lance study for risk factors of central venous catheter-related bloodstream infections. Am J Infect Contr 2004; 32: 131–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawar M, Mehta Y, Kapoor P et al. Central venous catheter-related blood stream infections: incidence, risk fac-tors, outcome, and associated pathogens. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2004; 18: 304–8
   Google Scholar
• Rodr_guez-Bano J. Selection of empiric therapy in patients with catheter-related infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002; 8: 275–281
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graninger W, Assadian O, Lagler H, Ramharter M. The role of glycopeptides in the treatment of intravascular catheter-related infections Clin Microbiol Infect 2002; 8: 310–315
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnie J, Matthews R, Jiman-Fatami A, et al. Analysis of 42 cases of septicemia caused by an epidemic strain of methi-cillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: evidence of resistance to vancomycin. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31: 684–689.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peck KR, Kim SW, Jung SI et al. Antimicrobials as potential adjunctive agents in the treatment of biofilm infection with Staphylococcus epidermidis. Chemotherapy 2003; 49: 189–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolff M. Treatment of severe Gram-positive infections: current situation and new opportunities. Presse Med. 2003; 32: 59–12.
   Google Scholar
• Monzon M, Oteiza C, Leiva J, Amorena B. Synergy of different antibiotic combinations in biofilms of Staphylococcus epidermidis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 200148: 793-801.
   Google Scholar
• Mulazimoglu L, Drenning SD, Muder RR.Vancomycin-gentamicin synergism revisited: effect of gentamicin suscepti-bility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996; 40: 1534–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shelburne SA, Musher DM, Hulten K et al. In vitro killing of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with drug combinations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48: 4016–9.
   Google Scholar
• Rijnders BJ, Peetermans WE, Verwaest C et al. Watchful waiting versus immediate catheter removal in ICU patients with suspected catheter-related infection: a random-ized trial. Intensive Care Med. 2004; 30: 1073–80.
   Google Scholar
• Cerca N, Pier GB, Vilanova M et al. Quantitative analy-sis of adhesion and biofilm formation on hydrophilic and hydrophobic surfaces of clinical isolates of Staphylococcus epidermidis. Res Microbiol. 2005; 156: 506–14.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp ME, Ulphani JS, Fey PD et al. Characterization of the importance of polysaccharide intercellular adhesin/hemagglutinin of Staphylococcus epidermidis in the pathogenesis of biomaterial-based infection in a mouse foreign body infection model. Infect Immun. 1999; 67: 2627–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wisplinghoff H, Bischoff T, Tallent SM et al. Nosocomial bloodstream infections in US hospitals: analysis of 24,179 cases from a prospective nationwide surveillance study. Clin Infect Dis. 2004; 39: 309–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coyle VM, McMullan R, Morris TC et al. Catheter-related bloodstream infection in adult haematology patients: catheter removal practice and outcome. J Hosp Infect. 2004; 57: 325–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miragaia M, Couto I, Pereira SF et al. Molecular char-acterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epider-midis clones: evidence of geographic dissemination. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40: 430–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biavasco F, Vignaroli C, Lazzarini R, Varaldo PE. Glycopeptide susceptibility profiles of Staphylococcus haemolyticus bloodstream isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000; 44: 3122–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biavasco F, Vignaroli C, Varaldo PE. Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2000; 19: 403–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El-Azizi M, Rao S, Kanchanapoom T, Khardori N. In vitro activity of vancomycin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, and line-zolid against intact and disrupted biofilms of staphylococci. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2005; 4: 2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hamilton-Miller JM, Shah S. Activity of quinupristin/dalfopristin against Staphylococcus epidermidis in biofilms: a comparison with ciprofloxacin. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1997; 39 Suppl A:103-8
   Google Scholar
• Curtin J, Cormican M, Fleming G et al. Linezolid com-pared with eperezolid, vancomycin, and gentamicin in an in vitro model of antimicrobial lock therapy Staphylococcus epi-dermidis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003; 47: 3145–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Feiter PW, Jacobs JA, Jacobs MJ, Vink C, van der Geest S. Successful treatment of Staphylococcus epidermidis prosthetic valve endocarditis with linezolid after failure of treat-ment with oxacillin, gentamicin, rifampicin, vancomycin, and fusidic acid regimens. Scand J Infect Dis 2005; 37: 173–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill CJ, Murphy MA, Hamer DH. Treatment of Staphylococcus epidermidis ventriculo-peritoneal shunt infec-tion with linezolid. J Infect 2002; 45: 129–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jover-Saenz A, Gaite FB, Ribelles AG, Porcel-Perez JM, Garrido-Calvo S. Linezolid treatment of total prosthetic knee infection due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epi-dermidis. J Infect 2003 ; 47: 87–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bassett' M, Vitale F, Melica G et al. Linezolid in the treatment of Gram-positive prosthetic joint infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 55: 387–90.
   Google Scholar
• Wiederhold NP, Coyle EA, Raad II, et al. Antibacterial activity of linezolid and vancomycin in an in vitro pharmacody-namic model of gram-positive catheter-related bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 55: 792–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fowler VG Jr, Miro JM, Hoen B, et al. Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis: a consequence of med-ical progress. JAMA 2005; 293: 3012–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abraham J, Mansour C, Veledar E, Khan B, Lerakis S. Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and endocarditis: the Grady Memorial Hospital experience with methicillin-sensitive S. aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus bacteremia. Am Heart J 2004; 147: 536–9.
   Google Scholar
• Raad II, Sabbagh MF. Optimal duration of therapy for catheter-related Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a study of 55 cases and review. Clin Infect Dis 1992; 14: 75–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahal JJ. Preventing second-generation complications due to S. aureus. Arch Intern Med 1989; 149: 503–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pea F, Bertolissi M, Di Silvestre A et al. TDM coupled with Bayesian forecasting should be considered an invaluable tool for optimizing vancomycin daily exposure in unstable crit-ically ill patients. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2002; 20: 326–32.
   Google Scholar
• Wysocki M, Delatour F, Faurisson F et al. Continuous versus intermittent infusion of vancomycin in severe Staphylococcal infections: prospective multicenter randomized study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001; 45: 2460–7.
   Google Scholar
• Vuagnat A, Stern R, Lotthe A et al. High dose van-comycin for osteomyelitis: continuous vs. intermittent infusion. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2004; 29: 351–7.
   Google Scholar
• pea p, Brollo L, Viale P, et al. Teicoplanin therapeutic drug monitoring in critically ill patients: a retrospective study emphasizing the importance of a loading dose. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003; 51: 971-5.
   Google Scholar
• Pea F, Viale P, Candoni A, et al. Teicoplanin in patients with acute leukaemia and febrile neutropenia: a spe-cial population benefiting from higher dosages. Clin Pharmacokinet 2004; 43: 405–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grim SA, Rapp RP, Martin CA, Evans ME. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole as a viable treatment option for infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Pharmacotherapy 2005; 25: 253–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loeb M, Main C, Walker-Dilks C, Eady A. Antimicrobial drugs for treating methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;(4):CD003340.
   Google Scholar
• Cunha BA. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: clinical manifestations and antimicrobial therapy. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2005;11 Suppl 4: 33–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Howden BP, Ward PB, Charles PG et al. Treatment outcomes for serious infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with reduced vancomycin susceptibili-ty. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 38: 521–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wunderink RG, Rello J, Cammarata SK, Croos-Dabrera RV, Kollef MH. Linezolid vs vancomycin: analysis of two double-blind studies of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia. Chest 2003; 124: 1789–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weigelt J, Itani K, Stevens D et al. Linezolid versus vancomycin in treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 2260–6.
   Google Scholar
• Jantausch BA, DeviIle J, Adler S, et al. Linezolid for the treatment of children with bacteremia or nosocomial pneu-monia caused by resistant gram-positive bacterial pathogens. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2003; 22 (9 Suppl.): S164-71.
   Google Scholar
• Raad I, Darouiche R, Vazquez J, et al. Efficacy and safety of weekly dalbavancin therapy for catheter-related bloodstream infection caused by gram-positive pathogens. Clin Infect Dis. 2005; 40: 374–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaudaux P, Francois P, Bisognano C et al. Comparative efficacy of daptomycin and vancomycin in the therapy of experimental foreign body infection due to Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003; 52: 89–95.
   Google Scholar
• Segreti J. Efficacy of current agents used in the treat-ment of Gram-positive infections and the consequences of resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect 2005;11 Suppl 3: 29–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kojic EM., Darouiche RO. Candida infections of med-ical devices. Clin Microbiol Rev 2004; 17: 255–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almirante B, Rodriguez D, Park BJ et al. Epidemiology and predictors of mortality in cases of Candida bloodstream infection: results from population-based surveil-lance, Barcelona, Spain, from 2002 to 2003. J Clin Microbiol. 2005; 43: 1829-35.
   Google Scholar
• Pappas PG, Rex JH, Sobel JD et al. Guidelines for treatment of candidiasis. Clin Infect Dis. 2004; 38: 161–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawser SP, Douglas II. Biofilm formation by Candida species on the surface of catheter materials in vitro. Infect Immun 1994; 62: 915–921.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mukherjee PK, Chandra J, Kuhn DM, Ghannoum MA. Mechanism of fluconazole resistance in Candida albicans biofilms: phase-specific role of efflux pumps and membrane sterols. Infect Immun 2003; 71: 4333–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mukherjee PK, Thou G, Munyon R, Ghannoum MA. Candida biofilm: a well-designed protected environment. Med Mycol 2005; 43: 191–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberger M, Leibovici L, Perez S et al. Characteristics of candidaemia with Candida albicans com-pared with non-albicans Candida species and predictors of mortality. J Hosp Infect 2005 Jul 8 [Epub ahead of print].
   Google Scholar
• Luzzati R, Amalfitano G, Lazzarini L, et al. Nosocomial candidemia in non-neutropenic patients at an Italian tertiary care hospital. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2000; 19: 602–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nucci M, Colombo AL, Silveira F et al. Risk factors for death in patients with candidemia. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1998; 19: 846–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viale P, Petrosillo N, Signorini L, Puoti M, Carosi G. Should lock therapy always be avoided for central venous catheter-associated fungal bloodstream infections? Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33: 1947–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson DC, Johnson FL, Goldman S. Preliminary results treating persistent central venous catheter infections with the antibiotic lock technique in pediatric patients. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1994; 13: 930–1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krzywda EA, Andris DA, Edmiston CE Jr, Quebbeman EJ. Treatment of Hickman catheter sepsis using antibiotic lock technique. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1995; 16: 596–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• San Miguel LG, Cobo J, Otheo E et al. Secular trends of candidemia in a large tertiary-care hospital from 1988 to 2000: emergence of Candida parapsilosis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2005; 26: 548–52.
   Google Scholar
• Abi-Said D, Anaissie EO, Uzun I et al. The epidemiol-ogy of hematogenous candidiasis caused by different Candida species. Clin Infect Dis 1997; 24: 1122–1128.
   Google Scholar
• Girmenia C, Martino P, De Bernardis F et al. Rising incidence of Candida parapsilosis fungemia in patients with hematologic malignancies: clinical aspects, predisposing fac-tors, and differential pathogenicity of the causative strains. Clin Infect Dis 1996; 23: 506–14.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, DM., Chandra J, Mukherjee PK., Ghannoum MA. Comparison of biofilms formed by Candida albicans and Candida parapsilosis on bioprosthetic surfaces. Infect Immun 2002; 70: 878–888.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pappas PG, Rex JH, Lee J et al. A prospective obser-vational study of candidemia: epidemiology, therapy, and influ-ences on mortality in hospitalized adult and pediatric patients. Clin Infect Dis 2003; 37: 634–43.
   Google Scholar
• Nucci M, Anaissie E. Should vascular catheters be removed from all patients with candidemia? An evidence-based review. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34: 591–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh TJ, Rex JH. All catheter-related candidemia is not the same: assessment of the balance between the risks and benefits of removal of vascular catheters. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34: 600–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole GT, Halawa AA, Anaissie EJ. The role of the gastrointestinal tract in hematogenous candidiasis: from the laboratory to the bedside. Clin Infect Dis 1996;22 Suppl 2: S73–88.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raad I, Hanna H, Boktour M, et al. Management of central venous catheters in patients with cancer and can-didemia. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 38: 1119–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boucher HW, Groll AH, Chiou C, Walsh TJ. Newer systemic antifungal agents: pharmacokinetics, safety and effi-cacy. Drugs. 2004; 64: 1997–2020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mora-Duarte J, Betts R, Rotstein C et al. Comparison of caspofungin and amphotericin B for invasive candidiasis. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 2020–9.
   Google Scholar
• Andes D, Nett J, Oschel P. Development and charac-terization of an in vivo central venous catheter Candida albi-cans biofilm model. Infect Immun 2004; 72: 6023–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cocuaud C, Rodier MH, Daniault G, Imbert C. Anti-metabolic activity of caspofungin against Candida albicans and Candida parapsilosis biofilms. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 56: 507–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soustre J, Rodier MH, Imbert-Bouyer S et al. Caspofungin modulates in vitro adherence of Candida albi-cans to plastic coated with extracellular matrix proteins. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 53: 522–5.
   Google Scholar
• Bachmann SP, VandeWalle K, Ramage G et al. In vitro activity of caspofungin against Candida albicans biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 3591–6.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn DM, George T, Chandra J. Antifungal suscepti-bility of Candida biofilms: unique efficacy of amphotericin B lipid formulations and echinocandins. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002; 46: 1773–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vidal F, Mensa J, Almela M et al. Bacteraemia in adults due to glucose non-fermentative Gram-negative bacilli other than P. aeruginosa. QJM. 2003; 96: 227–34.
   Google Scholar
• Paul M, Leibovici L. Combination antibiotic therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteraemia. Lancet Infect Dis. 2005; 5: 192–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Safdar N, Handelsman J, Maki DG. Does combination antimicrobial therapy reduce mortality in Gram-negative bac-teraemia? A meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2004 ; 4: 519-27 159 Paul M, Benuri-Silbiger I, Soares-Weiser K, LeiboviciL. Beta-lactam monotherapy versus beta-lactam-aminoglyco-side combination therapy for sepsis in immunocompetent patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials BMJ, 2004; 328: 668–82.
   Google Scholar
• Chastre J, Wolff M, Fagon JY et al. Comparison of 8 vs 15 days of antibiotic therapy for ventilator-associated pneu-monia in adults: a randomized trial. JAMA 2003; 290: 2588-98.
   Google Scholar
• von Eiff C, Jansen B, Kohnen W, Becker K. Infections associated with medical devices. Drugs 2005; 65: 179–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar