• G Simonova, C M Rickard, K R Dunster, D J Smyth, D McMillan, and J F Fraser.
• Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. g.simonova@uq.edu.au
• Anaesth Intensive Care. 2012 May 1; 40 (3): 460-6.

AbstractPartial or complete dislodgement of intravascular catheters remains a significant problem in hospitals despite current securement methods. Cyanoacrylate tissue adhesives (TA) are used to close skin wounds as an alternative to sutures. These adhesives have high mechanical strength and can remain in situ for several days. This study investigated in vitro use of TAs in securing intravascular catheters (IVC). We compared two adhesives for interaction with IVC material, comparing skin glues with current securement methods in terms of their ability to prevent IVC dislodgement and inhibit microbial growth. Two TAs (Dermabond, Ethicon Inc. and Histoacryl, B. Braun) and three removal agents (Remove™, paraffin and acetone) were tested for interaction with IVC material by use of tensile testing. TAs were also compared against two polyurethane (standard and bordered) dressings (Tegaderm™ 1624 and 1633, 3M Australia Pty Ltd) and an external stabilisation device (Statlock, Bard Medical, Covington) against control (unsecured IVCs) for ability to prevent pull-out of 16 G peripheral IVCs from newborn fresh porcine skin. Agar media containing pH-sensitive dye was used to assess antimicrobial properties of TAs and polyurethane dressings to inhibit growth of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Neither TA weakened the IVCs (P >0.05). Of removal agents, only acetone was associated with a significant decrease in IVC strength (P <0.05). Both TAs and Statlock significantly increased the pull-out force (P <0.01). TA was quick and easy to apply to IVCs, with no irritation or skin damage noted on removal and no bacterial colony growth under either TA.

30 keywords...

hide…