Prospective study of bacteremia and complications With EUS FNA of rectal and perirectal lesions

Diagnosis by Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Sampling through the Lower Gastrointestinal Tract

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) is very safe and has a high diagnostic rate for upper gastrointestinal lesions, especially pancreatic lesions, but its application in the lower gastrointestinal tract has rarely been reported. Due to the tortuous course of the colorectum, with the sigmoid colon particularly prone to perforation, most endoscopists are reluctant to perform lateral-sector endoscopic ultrasound scanning without a water-bag protection for the puncture. The ultrasonic endoscopy and flexible puncture needle techniques recently introduced into clinical practice have made ultrasound-guided puncture safer and more convenient. In addition, endoscopists have carefully tested various protective measures to improve the safety of the lower gastrointestinal puncture, substantially increasing its clinical feasibility. In this article, we review the iterations of endoscopic ultrasound equipment introduced in recent years and the many ingenious ideas proposed by endoscopists regarding lower gastrointestinal puncture.

The Risk of Rectal Temperature Measurement in Neutropenia

BACKGROUND

Avoiding rectal thermometry is recommended in patients with neutropenic fever. Permeability of the anal mucosa may result in a higher risk of bacteremia in these patients. Still, this recommendation is based on only a few studies.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all individuals admitted to our emergency department during 2014-2017 with afebrile (body temperature <38.3°C) neutropenia (neutrophil count <500 cells/microL) who were over the age of 18. Patients were stratified by the presence or absence of a rectal temperature measurement. The primary outcome was bacteremia during the first five days of index hospitalization; the secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

The study included 40 patients with rectal temperature measurements and 407 patients whose temperatures were only measured orally. Among patients with oral temperature measurements, 10.6% had bacteremia, compared to 5.1% among patients who had rectal temperature measurements. Rectal temperature measurement was not associated with bacteremia, neither in non-matched (odds ratio [OR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-1.77) nor in matched cohort analyses (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.04-3.29). In-hospital mortality was also similar between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with neutropenia who had their temperature taken using a rectal thermometer did not experience a higher frequency of events of documented bacteremia or increased in-hospital mortality.

Invasive Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Following Total Joint Arthroplasty Increases the Risk for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

The safety of postoperative colonoscopy and endoscopy following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) remains largely unknown. The objective of this study was to characterize the effect of gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures after TJA on the risk of postoperative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

METHODS

Using a large national database, patients who underwent an endoscopic procedure (colonoscopy or esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)) within 12 months after primary TJA were identified and matched in a 1:1 fashion based on procedure (primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) vs. total hip arthroplasty (THA), age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and smoking status with patients who did not undergo endoscopy. A total of 142,055 patients who underwent endoscopy within 12 months following TJA (96,804 TKA and 45,251 THA) were identified and matched. The impact of timing of endoscopy relative to TJA on postoperative outcomes was assessed. Pre-operative comorbidity profiles and 1-year complications were compared. Statistical analyses included Chi-squared tests and multivariate logistic regressions with outcomes considered significant at P <0.05.

RESULTS

Multivariate analyses revealed that endoscopy within 2 months following TKA and 1 month of THA was associated with a significantly increased odds of periprosthetic joint infection (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.29 [1.08-1.53]; P=.004; OR: 1.41 [1.01-1.90]; P=0.033, respectively). Patients who underwent endoscopy greater than 2 months from the timing of their TKA and 1 month from THA were not at significantly greater risk of developing PJI.

CONCLUSION

This data suggests that invasive endoscopic procedures should be delayed if possible by at least 2 months following TKA and 1 month following THA to minimize the risk of PJI.

Potential Role of Inflammation-Promoting Biliary Microbiome in Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis and Cholangiocarcinoma

Background: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a major risk factor for cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). We investigated biliary and fecal microbiota to determine whether specific microbes in the bile or stool are associated with PSC or CCA. Methods: Bile was obtained from 32 patients with PSC, 23 with CCA with PSC, 26 with CCA without PSC, and 17 controls. Over 90% of bile samples were from patients with perihilar CCA. Stool was obtained from 31 patients with PSC (11 were matched to bile), 16 with CCA with PSC (10 matched to bile), and 11 with CCA without PSC (6 matched to bile). Microbiota composition was assessed using 16SrRNA-marker-based sequencing and was compared between groups. Results: Bile has a unique microbiota distinguished from negative DNA controls and stool. Increased species richness and abundance of Fusobacteria correlated with duration of PSC and characterized the biliary microbiota in CCA. Stool microbiota composition showed no significant differences between groups. Conclusions: We identified a unique microbial signature in the bile of patients with increased duration of PSC or with CCA, suggesting a role for microbiota-driven inflammation in the pathogenesis and or progression to perihilar CCA. Further studies are needed to test this hypothesis.

Postpolypectomy fever in patients with serious infection: a report of two cases

Background

Postpolypectomy fever (PPF) is a rare complication in patients after colonoscopy. Because of the absence of evidence of microperforation and abdominal tenderness, patients with PPF usually present mild clinical symptoms with a good prognosis.

Case presentation

In this study, all patients who underwent colonoscopic examination in our hospital between January 2019 and December 2019 were enrolled. Of these, two patients developed PPF after polypectomy, exhibiting serious infection without definitive fever foci. One patient experienced rapidly aggravated type 1 respiratory failure and abnormal hepatic function, which were attributed to colonoscopy-associated infection. After active antibiotic therapy, both patients were discharged without any complications.

Conclusions

In summary, our study provides novel insights into patients with PPF who develop serious infections with life-threatening complications.

Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients With Total Knee Arthroplasty Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Nationwide Propensity Score Matched Study

BACKGROUND

The post-colonoscopy periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) risk in patients with total prosthetic knee joints has limited research. The present study investigated the PJI risk and determined the risk factors for post-colonoscopy PJI in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) recipients. The hypothesis was that colonoscopy is associated with an increased PJI risk in patients with total prosthetic knee joints. This study can potentially help guide the decision making for prophylactic antibiotic use for colonoscopy.

METHODS

This nationwide matched cohort study used claims data from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database and enrolled patients who underwent unilateral TKA between 2008 and 2016. The history of diagnostic colonoscopy was investigated at least 1 year postoperatively. The propensity score was matched between colonoscopy and non-colonoscopy cohorts, and the post-colonoscopy PJI risk was compared. The PJI risk following invasive colonoscopic procedures, including biopsy, polypectomy, and mucosal or submucosal resection, was investigated, and the risk factors for post-colonoscopy PJI were determined.

RESULTS

In total, 45,612 and 211,841 patients were matched in the colonoscopy and control cohorts, respectively. The colonoscopy cohort had greater 9-month and 1-year PJI risks from the index colonoscopy date than the matched controls (9 months: hazard ratio [HR] 1.836, P = .006; 1 year: HR 1.822, P = .031). Invasive colonoscopic procedures did not increase the PJI risk at any time point post-colonoscopy. The only significant risk factor for PJI was post-traumatic arthritis (adjusted HR 4.034, P = .023).

CONCLUSION

Colonoscopy was associated with an increased PJI risk in TKA recipients, regardless of concomitant invasive colonoscopic procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Prognostic.

Complications of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration: A Narrative Review

Considerable progress has been made recently in the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) to diagnose intra-luminal gastrointestinal lesions and extra-luminal lesions near the gastrointestinal tract. Numerous reports have indicated that EUS-FNA has high diagnostic performance and safety, which has led to the routine use of EUS-FNA and an increasing number of cases. Thus, while EUS-FNA has a low rate of complications, endoscopists may encounter these complications as the number of cases increases. Infrequent reports have also described life-threatening complications. Therefore, endoscopists should possess a comprehensive understanding of the complications of EUS-FNA, which include hemorrhage, perforation, infection, and acute pancreatitis, as well as their management. This review examines the available evidence regarding the complications associated with EUS-FNA, and the findings will be useful for ensuring that endoscopists perform EUS-FNA safely and appropriately.

The Endoscopy Patient as a Vector and Victim

Patient and procedural factors can increase the risk of infectious adverse events during endoscopy. Prophylactic antibiotic use must be judicious and individualized in the era of antibiotic resistance. New and emerging procedures require high-quality studies to elucidate appropriate risk profiles.

Rectal ultrasound with fine needle aspiration: an underutilized modality for delineating and diagnosing perirectal, presacral, and pelvic lesions

Background and study aims  The merits of rectal ultrasound for rectal cancer staging are well documented. Conventional approaches to accessing perirectal and presacral lesions entail computed tomography guidance via a transgluteal approach or frank surgical exploration. We report on the safety and efficacy of performing rectal ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration (RUS-FNA) for evaluating perirectal, presacral, and pelvic abnormalities. Patients and methods  Patients who underwent RUS-FNA of perirectal, presacral, or pelvic lesions between August 2005 and September 2016 were identified using an institutional database. Subjects were all individuals treated at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States. Patient demographics and imaging characteristics were noted. Procedural details included lesion size, location, echo appearance, and technical information. Patients were given antibiotics prior to FNA attempt and for 3 days after. Diagnostic yield, clinical utility, and complications were noted. Results  Twenty-seven patients met criteria during the specified study time period. The cohort consisted of 12 males (44.4 %) and 15 females (55.5 %). RUS-FNA was diagnostic in 24 patients (88.8 %) and obviated the need for surgery in 14 patients (51.9 %). There were four complications (14.8 %): two perirectal and two presacral abscesses. Conclusion  While the diagnostic yield of RUS-FNA is high and the potential to affect clinical decision-making is substantial, risk of complication is not negligible. RUS-FNA should only be performed if the result will substantially alter clinical management, and the decision to perform RUS-FNA should be made with close consultation between the endosonographer, surgeon, and/or medical or radiation oncologist.

Analysis of Cell-Free DNA to Assess Risk of Tumoremia Following Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Cellular and nuclear material from tumors disseminates into the bloodstream (tumoremia), but it is not clear whether medical procedures cause release of this material or contribute to formation of metastases. We performed a prospective study of blood samples from patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) to determine whether endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) associates with markers of tumoremia.

METHODS

We obtained peripheral blood from 104 patients (35 with PDAC) before and after EUS-FNA of primary tumors; blood samples from 69 healthy individuals were used as controls. Plasma concentrations of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) were measured, and cfDNA and primary tumor samples were analyzed to detect activating mutations in KRAS. Potential development of tumoremia was defined by an increase in cfDNA of 2-fold or more, and/or detection of mutant KRAS in samples collected after FNA from patients whose blood samples did not contain detectable mutant KRAS before FNA.

RESULTS

Peripheral blood concentrations of cfDNA were 1200 ng/ml (500-3300 ng/ml) before FNA vs 1400 ng/ml (900-4000 ng/ml) after FNA (P = .391). Tumoremia was detected in 10/35 patients (28.6%): 7 patients had a ≥2-fold increase in cfDNA concentration (20.6%) and 3 patients had circulating tumor DNA with KRAS mutations after FNA that were not detected before FNA (8.8%). New distant metastases were detected in 1.3 ± 0.82 patients with tumoremia vs 0.64 ± 0.81 without (P = .0375). Overall mortality did not differ significantly between patients with tumoremia (10/10 deaths, 100%) vs those without (19/25 deaths, 76%) nor did survival times of deceased patients (13.3 months for patients with tumoremia; range, 5.8-14.9 months vs 11.1 months for patients without tumoremia; range, 5.5-14.5 months). However, 6 patients without tumoremia were alive at a mean 23.9 months after EUS-FNA (range, 19.9-25 months after EUS-FNA) vs none of the patients with tumoremia.

CONCLUSION

In patients with PDAC, EUS-FNA associates with increased plasma concentration of cfDNA and increased detection of mutant KRAS after the procedure (markers of tumoremia and possible new distant metastasis). Although levels of cfDNA and activating mutations in KRAS are logical markers of tumoremia, they may not serve as the ideal biomarkers of this process. These findings are preliminary and do not indicate a need to modify current practice, yet further studies are needed.

Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound

Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) provides the unique opportunity to visualize, interrogate and intervene gastrointestinal (GI) luminal, mural or peri-luminal structures and pathology with negligible adverse effects. Diagnostic, upper GI and rectal EUS is feasible, extremely safe, and efficacious. Most EUS guided interventions are safe, effective and minimally invasive, compared to peers in the percutaneous radiological or surgical procedures. As with any endoscopic procedure, EUS and its guided interventions may be accompanied by adverse events. EUS related complications are generally infrequent in expert hands, and mainly include bleeding and perforation. However, the nature and severity of adverse events associated with each EUS guided procedure are unique. Hence, it is paramount for endosonographer to have sufficient knowledge of the indications, techniques, and potential risks involved before contemplating any given procedure. Most common intervention with EUS is transmural fine needle aspiration (FNA), which is an extremely safe procedure. EUS guided drainage procedures are rapidly evolving with newer devices and methods being employed. Among them, EUS guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collection-pseudocyst or walled off necrosis (WON), has largely replaced other methods (surgical, percutaneous or non-EUS endoscopic) with acceptable complications. Currently, dedicated metal stents are more widely used compared to plastic stents for drainage of PFC, especially WON. EUS has made a definite impact in biliary access and drainage of obstructed biliary system, in patients where ERCP has failed or is technically not possible, closely competing with percutaneous biliary drainage. In spite of some complications, recent improvement in devices for bilio-enteric fistula creation and stent designs, has added to its safety and efficacy. EUS guided pancreatic duct drainage remains the most challenging of EUS guided interventions where in-roads are being made.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Biopsy for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Pelvic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative diagnosis of pelvic lesions remains challenging despite advances in imaging technologies. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biopsy is an effective diagnostic modality for sampling the digestive tract and surrounding areas. However, a meta-analysis summarizing the diagnostic efficacy of EUS-guided biopsy for pelvic lesions has not been published.

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the utility of EUS-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of pelvic lesions.

METHODS

Articles were identified via structured database search; only studies where pelvic lesions were confirmed by surgery or clinical follow-up were included. Data extracted were selected with strict criteria. A fixed-effects model was used to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was also constructed.

RESULTS

Ten studies containing a total of 246 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity of EUS-guided biopsy for differential diagnosis of pelvic masses was 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.94), and the specificity was 0.93 (95% CI 0.86-0.97). The area under the SROC was 0.9631. The combined PLR, NLR, and DOR were 11.75 (95% CI 5.90-23.43), 0.12 (95% CI 0.07-0.20), and 100.06 (95% CI 37.48-267.10) respectively. There is potential presence of publication bias in this meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis shows that EUS-guided biopsy is a powerful tool for differentiating pelvic masses with a high sensitivity and specificity. Furthermore, it is a safe procedure with low rate of complication, although more high-quality prospective studies are required to be done.

Echoendoscopes

Advances in echoendoscopes and their processors have significantly expanded the role of EUS and its clinical applications.The diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities of EUS continue to evolve and improve. EUS has made a large impact on patient care but comes with significant startup and maintenance costs. As improved technology continues to enhance image resolution while decreasing the size of EUS processors, use of endosonography will become more widespread. EUS will continue to be a vital part of patient care and complement currently available cross-sectional imaging.

Population-based epidemiology and microbiology of community-onset bloodstream infections

Bloodstream infection (BSI) is a major cause of infectious disease morbidity and mortality worldwide. While a positive blood culture is mandatory for establishment of the presence of a BSI, there are a number of determinants that must be considered for establishment of this entity. Community-onset BSIs are those that occur in outpatients or are first identified <48 h after admission to hospital, and they may be subclassified further as health care associated, when they occur in patients with significant prior health care exposure, or community associated, in other cases. The most common causes of community-onset BSI include Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Antimicrobial-resistant organisms, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and extended-spectrum β-lactamase/metallo-β-lactamase/carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae, have emerged as important etiologies of community-onset BSI.

Bacteremia after Endoscopic Submucosal Excavation for Treating the Gastric Muscular Layer Tumors

Background. The bacteremia is reported as being infrequent and transient in gastric EMR and ESD for treating gastric mucosa lesions or superficial gastric neoplastic lesion. There was no report of it being investigated in ESD for treating gastric muscular layer tumors (endoscopic submucosal excavation, ESE). This study aimed to determine the frequency of bacteremia in gastric ESE. Patients and Methods. A prospective study, in 122 consecutive patients who underwent gastric ESE for treating gastric muscular layer tumors, investigated the frequency of bacteremia before and 15 minutes after the procedure. Results. The median time for the total ESE procedure was 29 min (range from 8 to 62 min). The mean size of the biggest diameter of each resected specimen was 10 ± 2.7 mm (range from 5 mm to 30 mm). Blood cultures obtained before ESE were positive in 0% (0/122) of cases. Blood cultures obtained 15 min after ESE were positive in 2.5% (3/122) of cases. Six blood samples contained Staphylococcus with coagulase negative, which was considered contaminant. No signs of sepsis were seen in all patients. Conclusions. The frequency of bacteremia after gastric ESE was low. ESE for treating gastric lesions is thought to have a low risk of infectious complications; therefore, prophylactic administration of antibiotics may not be warranted.

Basic techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for solid lesions: Adverse events and avoiding them

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is often the preferred technique for tissue acquisition in the diagnosis of suspected intrathoracic and intraabdominal pathology. Although EUS FNA is a safe and accurate procedure, it has been associated with a low risk of adverse events. The unique properties of the echoendoscope and its ability to acquire tissue outside of the gastrointestinal lumen impart risks that are not associated with routine endoscopic procedures. In this review, we discuss the risk of perforation related to the echoendoscope itself and adverse events related to FNA of solid masses including infections, bleeding, pancreatitis and pancreatic duct leak, bile duct leak and tumor seeding. We also provide tips on how to avoid the most common adverse events related to EUS-FNA.

Postpolypectomy Fever, a rare adverse event of polypectomy: nested case-control study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Although postpolypectomy fever (PPF) without colon perforation or hemorrhage is rare, its incidence and risk factors have not been investigated. The objective of this study was to analyze the incidence and risk factors for PPF among inpatients.

METHODS

Seven patients with PPF were matched with 70 patients without PPF from a total of 3,444 patients who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy. The PPF incidence during index hospitalization after colonoscopy was calculated, and univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to calculate the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for risk factors.

RESULTS

PPF without bleeding or perforation in the colon occurred in seven patients (0.2%). The median age was 58 years for cases and 61 years for controls. The median interval from polypectomy to occurrence of fever was 7 hours, and the median duration of fever was 9 hours. Polyp size >2 cm (adjusted OR, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.15; p=0.02) and hypertension (adjusted OR, 14.40; 95% CI, 1.23 to 180.87; p=0.03) were associated with a significantly increased risk of PPF. PPF increased the length of hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the crude incidence of PPF is low, PPF may prolong hospitalization. Risk factors for PPF include hypertension and large polyps.

Prospective evaluation of adverse events following lower gastrointestinal tract EUS FNA

OBJECTIVES

There are virtually no data concerning the risk of adverse events (AEs) following lower gastrointestinal (LGI) endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). Our aim was to determine the incidence and factors associated with AEs following LGI EUS fine needle aspiration (FNA).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study at a tertiary referral center. Five hundred and sixty-three patients underwent LGI EUS FNA between 1 January 2004 and 1 January 2012. We analyzed the 502 patients who had complete follow-up. AE severity was graded (1-5) utilizing Common Terminology Criteria or Visual Analog Scale. AEs were assessed during the procedures, in clinical follow-up, during phone interviews conducted at 7-14 days, and final clinical and/or phone interviews at 2-4 months.

RESULTS

AEs developed in 103 (20.5%) patients and were classified as grade 1, 2, 3, or 4 in 34 (6.8%), 41 (8.2%), 23 (4.6%), and 5 (1.0%) patients, respectively. Bleeding and pain were the commonest AEs. No deaths occurred. On multivariate analysis, AEs were associated with prior pain (odds ratio (OR): 3.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.35-6.25), FNA from a site other than a lymph node (LN) or gut wall (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.10-4.70), and malignant FNA cytology (OR: 1.80, 95% CI: 1.10-2.97); serious (grade 3-4) AEs were associated with prior pain (OR: 15.21, 95% CI: 5.04-45.85) and FNA from a site other than a LN or gut wall (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.15-9.20).

CONCLUSIONS

LGI EUS FNA is associated with a high rate of serious grades 3-4 AEs. This may reflect the total number of associated interventions and the frequency of underlying pathology and symptoms.

Increased risk of prosthetic joint infection associated with esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy with biopsy

BACKGROUND

There are no prospective data regarding the risk of prosthetic joint infection following routine gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures. We wanted to determine the risk of prosthetic hip or knee infection following gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures in patients with joint arthroplasty.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, single-center, case-control study at a single, tertiary-care referral center. Cases were defined as adult patients hospitalized for prosthetic joint infection of the hip or knee between December 1, 2001 and May 31, 2006. Controls were adult patients with hip or knee arthroplasties but without a diagnosis of joint infection, hospitalized during the same time period at the same orthopedic hospital. The main outcome measure was the odds ratio (OR) of prosthetic joint infection after gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures performed within 2 years before admission.

RESULTS

339 cases and 339 controls were included in the study. Of these, 70 cases (21%) cases and 82 controls (24%) had undergone a gastrointestinal endoscopic procedure in the preceding 2 years. Among gastrointestinal procedures that were assessed, esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (EGD) with biopsy was associated with an increased risk of prosthetic joint infection (OR = 3, 95% CI: 1.1-7). In a multivariable analysis adjusting for sex, age, joint age, immunosuppression, BMI, presence of wound drain, prior arthroplasty, malignancy, ASA score, and prothrombin time, the OR for infection after EGD with biopsy was 4 (95% CI: 1.5-10).

INTERPRETATION

EGD with biopsy was associated with an increased risk of prosthetic joint infection in patients with hip or knee arthroplasties. This association will need to be confirmed in other epidemiological studies and adequately powered prospective clinical trials prior to recommending antibiotic prophylaxis in these patients.

Diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography: Assessment of safety and prevention of complications

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has gained wide acceptance as an important, minimally invasive diagnostic tool in gastroenterology, pulmonology, visceral surgery and oncology. This review focuses on data regarding risks and complications of non-interventional diagnostic EUS and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB). Measures to improve the safety of EUS und EUS-FNB will be discussed. Due to the specific mechanical properties of echoendoscopes in EUS, there is a low but noteworthy risk of perforation. To minimize this risk, endoscopists should be familiar with the specific features of their equipment and their patients’ specific anatomical situations (e.g., tumor stenosis, diverticula). Most diagnostic EUS complications occur during EUS-FNB. Pain, acute pancreatitis, infection and bleeding are the primary adverse effects, occurring in 1% to 2% of patients. Only a few cases of needle tract seeding and peritoneal dissemination have been reported. The mortality associated with EUS and EUS-FNB is 0.02%. The risks associated with EUS-FNB are affected by endoscopist experience and target lesion. EUS-FNB of cystic lesions is associated with an increased risk of infection and hemorrhage. Peri-interventional antibiotics are recommended to prevent cyst infection. Adequate education and training, as well consideration of contraindications, are essential to minimize the risks of EUS and EUS-FNB. Restricting EUS-FNB only to patients in whom the cytopathological results may be expected to change the course of management is the best way of reducing the number of complications.

An ex vivo bacteriologic study comparing antiseptic techniques for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) via the gastrointestinal tract

BACKGROUND

NOTES via the gastrointestinal tract raises the specter of intra-peritoneal infection. Various anti-microbial techniques have been employed in animal and human survival studies, including saline lavage, intravenous and topical antibiotics, and povidone-iodine, although there is a paucity of data regarding their general effectiveness.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of existing sterilization techniques for NOTES by quantifying and speciating colony-forming units (CFUs) before and after treatment.

DESIGN

Ex vivo animal studies; bacteriological study.

METHODS

Stomachs and distal colons were harvested en bloc from ten fasted adult white pigs following euthanasia. Half received cefazolin 1 g intravenously prior to killing. Multiple tissue samples were obtained from each resected organ. Each tissue sample was then assigned to one of five treatment arms: (1) normal saline, (2) Betadine, (3) cefazolin/metronidazole suspension, (4) chlorhexidine, (5) no treatment. Fifteen samples were used per arm. After treatment, the mucosal surface of each sample was swabbed and inoculated in normal saline, followed by serial dilutions, which were then plated onto sheep's blood agar plates and incubated under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. CFUs were quantified and speciated.

RESULTS

Median bacterial density was estimated to be 8.0 × 10(5) CFUs/ml (stomach) and 1.9 × 10(6) CFUs/ml (colon). The predominant organisms were Escherichia coli (stomach) and both E. coli and Enterococcus sp. (colon). Saline and antibiotic suspension lavages caused a 1-log reduction in stomach and colon. Betadine/chlorhexidine lavage resulted in a 4-log reduction. Intravenous antibiotics alone resulted in a 4-log reduction. Combining intravenous antibiotics and either Betadine or chlorhexidine decreased counts to the 10(1) level. By Kruskal-Wallis method, differences were statistically significant (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of intravenous antibiotics in addition to topical Betadine or chlorhexidine effectively reduced microbial burden in both gastric and colonic mucosa in this porcine model to the 10(1) level.

Prospective assessment of risk of bacteremia following colorectal stent placement

BACKGROUND

Colorectal stent insertion is an invasive endoscopic procedure. However, there are no reports regarding the incidence of bacteremia with colorectal stent.

OBJECTIVE

This study was to evaluate the risk of bacteremia and infectious complications after stent insertion for colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

Patients who underwent colorectal stent insertion were enrolled consecutively. Blood cultures were obtained before colorectal stent insertion and at 30 min after the procedure. Patients were monitored for 48 h after colorectal stent insertion to detect the development of infectious complications. Procedural data collected included location of obstruction, degree of bowel preparation, obstructive symptoms, and the time required for the procedure.

RESULTS

Of 64 patients undergoing colorectal stent, four (6.3%) had a positive post-stent blood culture. All patients, including those with positive cultures, remained asymptomatic during the 48 h after the procedure. Site of obstruction, degree of bowel preparation, age, and underlying disease were not different between the two groups. Development of bacteremia was associated with long procedure time (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal stent insertion does not induce significant bacteremia in patients with colorectal obstruction. These findings suggest that the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics may not be necessary in colorectal stent insertion.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in noncardiac prosthetic device recipients

BACKGROUND

Secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis involves the use of ≥ 1 antimicrobial agent just prior to the time when a diagnostic/therapeutic procedure, which may induce infection, is to be performed. In the context of this article, antimicrobial agent(s) are administered to patients with ≥ 1 implanted prosthetic device in order to prevent metastatic seeding of the device(s) during bacteremia induced by a diagnostic/therapeutic procedure. Antimicrobial agents used in this context are only administered periprocedurally. Secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis of endocarditis in recipients of cardiac prosthetic materials (including valves, shunts, conduits, and patches) has been reasonably well established. However, secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis in recipients of other types of prosthetic devices has been the subject of much controversy, with a wide variety of recommendations being made.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article was to conduct a narrative review of the published literature on the topic of secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis in recipients of noncardiac prosthetic devices and make evidence-based recommendations for each type of device, where possible.

METHODS

Medline/PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for English-language articles published from 1950 to the present (January 2012). Search terms included "prophylaxis," "antibiotics," "antimicrobials," "prosthetic devices," "prosthesis-related infections," "bacteremia," the names of the individual types of prosthetic devices, and the names of the individual procedures potentially inducing bacteremia. Articles dealing with any aspect relevant to this topic were eligible for review. The bibliographies of retrieved articles were also carefully scanned to identify any articles not previously identified.

RESULTS

Based on review of the available literature, secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis is justified in only a few specific circumstances. For recipients of prosthetic vascular grafts/stents, hemodialysis arteriovenous shunts, and ventriculoatrial/ventriculovenous shunts, prophylaxis is warranted during the initial 6 months, initial 6 weeks, and at all times after implantation/revision, respectively, when dental procedures capable of inducing high-level bacteremia are planned. Prosthetic joint recipients should receive prophylaxis in the following 3 circumstances: 1) patient is to undergo dental procedure(s) capable of inducing high-level bacteremia plus either the patient is still within 2 years of device implantation/revision or the patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for hematogenous prosthetic joint infection; 2) patient is to undergo genitourinary tract procedure(s) capable of inducing high-level bacteremia plus the patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for high-risk bacteriuria; and 3) patient is to undergo perforating dermatologic surgery on the oral mucosa or at skin sites at increased risk for surgical site infection plus patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for hematogenous prosthetic joint infection. The data are inadequate to justify secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis for recipients of other types of prosthetic devices. On the basis of 9 surveys of prescriber behavior, it is apparent that there exists, over a wide geographic area, a wide disconnect between clinical practice and the secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines issued by the professional organizations representing these prescribers. Antimicrobial agent overuse was especially problematic among orthopedic and colorectal surgeons, urologists, and family practitioners. Dentists and maxillofacial surgeons followed guidelines more closely.

CONCLUSION

Device-, procedure-, and patient characteristic-dependent factors elicited over many years have narrowed down the secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis recommendations for noncardiac prosthetic devices to a small number. Despite this, physician prescribers frequently do not follow prophylaxis guidelines established by their own professional organizations. Risk-benefit and cost-effectiveness studies have found that no prophylaxis is actually superior to universal prophylaxis, likely due to known antimicrobial toxicities, such as anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions and Clostridium difficile-associated disease. Much work remains in establishing and extending the scientific basis for secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis and transforming this knowledge into appropriate action by the clinician.

Utility of EUS-guided biopsy of extramural pelvic masses

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic utility of EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) and EUS-guided Trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) of pelvic masses has not been well described.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the utility of EUS in the diagnosis of pelvic masses.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Single tertiary referral hospital in Indianapolis, Indiana.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients referred for EUS evaluation of pelvic mass from January 2002 to July 2009. Patients with newly diagnosed rectal cancer or a known/suspected intramural mass were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS-FNA and/or EUS-TCB.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Endosonographic features and cytological and pathological findings were evaluated. The final diagnosis was confirmed by surgical pathology or cytology and clinical follow-up. The sensitivities and specificities of EUS-TCB were calculated in a subset of patients with available surgical pathology.

RESULTS

A total of 69 patients were identified, and 40 with intramural lesions (n = 36) or incomplete follow-up (n = 4) were excluded. The remaining 29 patients (15 men, mean age 58.5 ± 10.8 years) with pelvic masses (mean size 40.8 ± 20.1 mm) were evaluated. EUS-FNA or EUS-TCB helped to make the diagnosis in 25 of 29 patients (86%). Compared with surgical pathology (available in 17 patients), EUS-FNA had a sensitivity of 88% (95% CI, 53%-98%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 65%-100%) for malignancy. EUS-TCB alone had a sensitivity of 67% (95% CI, 21%-94%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI, 34%-100%) for malignancy, but the combination of EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 68%-100%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI, 68%-100%). Complications after EUS-FNA included a pelvic abscess in 2 patients (7%) with a cystic pelvic mass.

LIMITATION

Single-center study.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB are sensitive for the diagnosis of malignancy in pelvic masses. Sampling of cystic masses in this region is discouraged.

EUS-guided fine needle aspiration and trucut needle biopsy for examination of rectal and perirectal lesions

OBJECTIVE

Few studies have assessed the diagnostic efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and/or trucut biopsy (TCB) in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of EUS-FNA and/or TCB in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions. We also assessed their influence on the management and clinical course of these patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed EUS-FNA and/or TCB in 11 consecutive patients (4 men and 7 women, 33-69 years) with rectal and perirectal lesions for whom conventional diagnostic tools could not provide definitive diagnoses. Patients with definite intraluminal cancer were excluded.

RESULTS

The 11 patients underwent 12 procedures, with 9 being EUS-FNA alone and 3 being EUS-FNA and TCB. Seven patients had rectal lesions and four had perirectal lesions. Initial EUS-FNA and/or TCB established a diagnosis of malignancy in five patients and of benign lesions in four. EUS-FNA plus TCB confirmed malignant lymphoma after diagnostic failure of initial EUS-FNA in one patient. In one other patient with suspicious secondary linitis plastica, EUS-FNA could not establish a definitive diagnosis. Correct diagnoses were obtained in 10 out of 11 patients who underwent EUS-FNA and/or TCB. EUS-FNA and/or TCB changed clinical courses, which included avoidance of unnecessary surgeries, having a chance of anal sphincter-saving surgeries, and timely administration of chemotherapy. No serious complications related to the use of EUS-FNA or TCB were evident.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNA and/or TCB are useful in the diagnostic evaluation of and appropriate therapeutic plan in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions.

Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of america

This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002. It is intended as a guide for the use of antimicrobial agents in managing patients with cancer who experience chemotherapy-induced fever and neutropenia. Recent advances in antimicrobial drug development and technology, clinical trial results, and extensive clinical experience have informed the approaches and recommendations herein. Because the previous iteration of this guideline in 2002, we have a developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis. Furthermore, categorizing neutropenic patients as being at high risk or low risk for infection according to presenting signs and symptoms, underlying cancer, type of therapy, and medical comorbidities has become essential to the treatment algorithm. Risk stratification is a recommended starting point for managing patients with fever and neutropenia. In addition, earlier detection of invasive fungal infections has led to debate regarding optimal use of empirical or preemptive antifungal therapy, although algorithms are still evolving. What has not changed is the indication for immediate empirical antibiotic therapy. It remains true that all patients who present with fever and neutropenia should be treated swiftly and broadly with antibiotics to treat both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens. Finally, we note that all Panel members are from institutions in the United States or Canada; thus, these guidelines were developed in the context of North American practices. Some recommendations may not be as applicable outside of North America, in areas where differences in available antibiotics, in the predominant pathogens, and/or in health care-associated economic conditions exist. Regardless of venue, clinical vigilance and immediate treatment are the universal keys to managing neutropenic patients with fever and/or infection.

Executive Summary: Clinical Practice Guideline for the Use of Antimicrobial Agents in Neutropenic Patients with Cancer: 2010 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002. It is intended as a guide for the use of antimicrobial agents in managing patients with cancer who experience chemotherapy-induced fever and neutropenia.

Recent advances in antimicrobial drug development and technology, clinical trial results, and extensive clinical experience have informed the approaches and recommendations herein. Because the previous iteration of this guideline in 2002, we have a developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis. Furthermore, categorizing neutropenic patients as being at high risk or low risk for infection according to presenting signs and symptoms, underlying cancer, type of therapy, and medical comorbidities has become essential to the treatment algorithm. Risk stratification is a recommended starting point for managing patients with fever and neutropenia. In addition, earlier detection of invasive fungal infections has led to debate regarding optimal use of empirical or preemptive antifungal therapy, although algorithms are still evolving.

What has not changed is the indication for immediate empirical antibiotic therapy. It remains true that all patients who present with fever and neutropenia should be treated swiftly and broadly with antibiotics to treat both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens.

Finally, we note that all Panel members are from institutions in the United States or Canada; thus, these guidelines were developed in the context of North American practices. Some recommendations may not be as applicable outside of North America, in areas where differences in available antibiotics, in the predominant pathogens, and/or in health care–associated economic conditions exist. Regardless of venue, clinical vigilance and immediate treatment are the universal keys to managing neutropenic patients with fever and/or infection.

Assessment of morbidity and mortality associated with EUS-guided FNA: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) permits both morphologic and cytologic analysis of lesions within or adjacent to the GI tract. Although previous studies have evaluated the accuracy of EUS-FNA, little is known about the complications of EUS-FNA. Moreover, the frequency and severity of complications may vary from center to center and may be related to differences in individual experience.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the morbidity and mortality associated with EUS-FNA.

DESIGN

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to identify relevant English-language articles.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

EUS-FNA-specific morbidity and mortality rates.

RESULTS

We identified 51 articles with a total of 10,941 patients who met our inclusion and exclusion criteria; the overall rate of EUS-FNA-specific morbidity was 0.98% (107/10,941). In the small proportion of patients with complications of any kind, the rates of pancreatitis (36/8246; 0.44%) and postprocedure pain (37/10,941; 0.34%) were 33.64% (36/107) and 34.58% (37/107), respectively. The mortality rate attributable to EUS-FNA-specific morbidity was 0.02% (2/10,941). Subgroup analysis showed that the morbidity rate was 2.44% in prospective studies compared with 0.35% in retrospective studies for pancreatic mass lesions (P=.000), whereas it was 2.33% versus 5.07% for pancreatic cysts (P=.036).

LIMITATIONS

Few articles reported well-designed, prospective studies and few focused on overall complications after EUS-FNA.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNA-related morbidity and mortality rates are relatively low, and most associated events are mild to moderate in severity.

[Gastrointestinal endoscopy and infection]

During a gastrointestinal endoscopy, the device crosses natural cavities with always commensal bacterial flora, sometimes pathogenic flora. In all cases, the device is contaminated after the exam. The lack of effective disinfection exposes to the risks of transmission of germs. The infectious risk depends on the patient, the endoscopic procedure as well as on the technique of disinfection. The bacteraemia is usually not clinically significant. The endoscopic transmission of the germs from a patient to another one is very rare and is mostly due to a defect of disinfection. The procedures for disinfecting equipment should be known, established and controlled.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy and trucut biopsy in gastroenterology - An overview

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsies are reliable, safe and effective techniques in obtaining samples for cytological or histological examinations either as a primary procedure or in cases where other biopsy techniques have failed. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA), as well as endoscopic ultrasound-guided trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB), has proven to be of significant value in the diagnostic evaluation of benign and malignant diseases, as well as in staging of the malignant tumours of the gastrointestinal tract and of adjacent organs. The diagnostic yield of EUS-guided biopsies depends on site, size and characteristics of target tissues as well as technical and procedural factors (type of needle, biopsy technique and material processing). Other weighting factors include expertise, training and interaction between the endosonographer and cytopathologist. Rapid on-site cytological evaluation has proven to be successful in optimising the diagnostic efficiency of EUS-FNA. A sensible alternative is to collect specimens for histological and immunohistochemical investigations in addition to the cytological smears. EUS-FNA using a 22-gauge needle is successful in harvesting core biopsies in approximately three out of four cases. Therefore, the use of 19-gauge needles for EUS-FNA or EUS-TCB may only be necessary in selected cases. The reproducibility of cytopathological diagnosis among pathologists with special experience in assessing material obtained by EUS-guided biopsies is very high. False-positive diagnosis of malignancy in EUS-guided biopsy is rare. False-negative diagnosis appears with variable frequency depending on the target tissue, technical factors and expertise of the endosonographer and cytopathologist. There are numerous challenges and pitfalls in the differential diagnostic classification of benign and malignant lesions. These problems are related to the characteristics of samples obtained by EUS-guided biopsy, as well as to the multiple diagnoses with similar or overlapping cytological or histological characteristics. The high prognostic and therapeutic relevance of the cytopathological diagnoses resulting from EUS-guided biopsy calls for a shared responsibility of an endosonographer and a cytopathologist.

[New anaerobic bacterial species in human infections]

This review offers succinct, precise, and complete information based on the available data concerning new anaerobic bacterial species involved in infectious diseases in humans. All hitherto undescribed species, those not previously implicated in clinical conditions, those with confirmed implication in human disease that have not been characterized, and those that have undergone taxonomic changes are considered to be "new".