Display options
Share it on

Biomater Res. 2017 Nov 15;21:23. doi: 10.1186/s40824-017-0109-3. eCollection 2017.

Comparison of in vivo antibacterial and antithrombotic activities of two types of pulmonary artery catheters in pig.

Biomaterials research

Jung Wook Han, Yeon Soo Shin, Jung Ju Kim, Ho Sung Son

Affiliations

  1. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Korea University Medical Center, #73, Inchon-Ro, Sungbuk-Gu, Seoul, 136-705 South Korea.
  2. Korea Artificial Organ Center, Korea University, #73, Inchon-Ro, Sungbuk-Gu, Seoul, 136-705 South Korea.

PMID: 29167746 PMCID: PMC5686838 DOI: 10.1186/s40824-017-0109-3

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) implantation, inaccurate measurements of hemodynamic parameters due to infection or thrombosis of PAC can result in severe complications.

METHOD: In order to develop a new PAC material, we evaluated the antibacterial and antithrombotic activities of the two types of PAC (Swan Ganz catheter and prototype catheter) in 14 pigs.

RESULTS: In the 3-day group, bacterial infection rate was not different between the two types of PAC. In the 7-day group, bacterial infection rate of the prototype catheter was twice as elevated as that of the Swan-Ganz catheter. In the 3-day group, thrombus formation rate of the prototype catheter was twice as elevated as that of the Swan-Ganz catheter. In the 7-day group, thrombus formation rate was the same for the two types of PAC.

CONCLUSION: Here, we report an experimental pig model that confirms differences in antibacterial and antithrombotic activities.

Keywords: Infection; Pig; Pulmonary artery catheter; Thrombosis

References

  1. Anesthesiology. 1995 Feb;82(2):583-6 - PubMed
  2. JAMA. 2000 May 17;283(19):2568-72 - PubMed
  3. Am Heart J. 2014 Jun;167(6):876-83 - PubMed
  4. Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2015 Oct;240(10):1362-72 - PubMed
  5. Future Microbiol. 2010 Jun;5(6):917-33 - PubMed
  6. JAMA. 1996 Sep 18;276(11):889-97 - PubMed
  7. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1997 Jul;10(3):505-20 - PubMed
  8. Intensive Care Med. 2015 Oct;41(10):1831-2 - PubMed
  9. Crit Care Med. 1994 Apr;22(4):573-9 - PubMed
  10. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2014 Dec;28(4):323-35 - PubMed
  11. J Invest Surg. 1988;1(1):65-79 - PubMed
  12. Vet Pathol. 2012 Mar;49(2):344-56 - PubMed
  13. JAMA. 2000 May 17;283(19):2559-67 - PubMed
  14. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1990 Jan;3(1):46-65 - PubMed
  15. Ann Surg. 1985 Feb;201(2):237-41 - PubMed
  16. N Engl J Med. 1970 Aug 27;283(9):447-51 - PubMed

Publication Types