Frontiers in Medicine (Nov 2018)
Quantification of Lipoteichoic Acid in Hemodialysis Patients With Central Venous Catheters
Abstract
Hemodialysis patients with central venous catheters (CVCs) have chronic systemic inflammation, the source of which may be related to intraluminal bacterial biofilm. There is currently no non-invasive method to adequately evaluate intraluminal biofilm. Lipoteichoic acid (LTA) is a Gram-positive bacterial cell wall component that is spontaneously shed. The purpose of this study was to determine whether LTA could be quantified in biological samples and to evaluate potential relationships to markers of inflammation. Heparin-locked catheter aspirate was drawn from both the arterial and venous ports of each CVC prior to dialysis initiation. Venous blood from the dialysis circuit was collected 30 min after dialysis initiation. LTA was quantified in aspirate and plasma. Key markers of inflammation (interleukin-6, and hepcidin) and endothelial dysfunction (soluble vascular endothelial cadherin) were also determined in plasma samples. Catheter aspirate and systemic blood samples were obtained from 40 hemodialysis patients. The median (range) duration of catheter use was 130 (20–1635) days. Unexpectedly, median (range) plasma LTA concentrations (ng/mL) were significantly higher than catheter aspirate LTA concentrations [3.93 (0.25–15) vs. 2.38 (0.1–8.1), respectively, p = 0.01] in the majority (70%) of patients. Area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve showed good potential prognostic value of catheter aspirate LTA predicting systemic LTA concentrations with an area under the curve of 0.815 (95% CI, 0.68–0.95). A significant correlation was found between LTA and serum ferritin (r = 0.32, p = 0.04), however, there were no significant correlations between LTA and the other inflammation biomarkers assessed. LTA is quantifiable in aspirate and plasma of hemodialysis patients with CVCs and warrants further investigation to determine potential clinical application to intraluminal biofilm evaluation.
Keywords