Evidence Hub

Meropenem-Heparin Lock Therapy for Ochrobactrum intermedium Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection in a Pediatric Hemodialysis Patient: A Case Report and Literature Review

Rodrigues MCD, Sillva FT, de Oliveira AP, Moon YJK, de Lima Benzi JR

Hemodialysis international. International Symposium on Home Hemodialysis, 2026

Abstract

Background: In pediatric hemodialysis patients with exhausted vascular access, managing rare pathogens like Ochrobactrum intermedium is challenging, often posing a dilemma between catheter removal and salvage attempts. There are few reports on the supported viability of meropenem-heparin lock therapy for this purpose in pediatric patients.

Case presentation: We present the case of a 12-year-old male with chronic kidney disease on hemodialysis who was admitted with sepsis attributed to her long-term hemodialysis catheter. Ochrobactrum intermedium was isolated from all catheter lumens and blood cultures. Due to a documented history of vascular access failure, catheter salvage was the primary goal. A combined systemic antibiotic and lock therapy with meropenem and unfractionated heparin was initiated. Critically, bacteremia relapsed promptly after a planned temporary suspension of the lock therapy, while systemic antibiotics were continued. Definitive microbiological eradication was only achieved after the re-initiation and completion of a 14-day course of the lock therapy, resulting in full clinical recovery and long-term catheter preservation. This case report suggests the potential efficacy of meropenem lock therapy as a salvage strategy for O. intermedium CRBSI when catheter removal is not a viable option. The relapse upon its suspension highlights that the lock therapy itself was the critical component for eradicating the O. intermedium biofilm, a feat the systemic…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free