UpToDate
Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2017 UpToDate, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved.

Medline ® Abstracts for References 4,5

of 'Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) septic complications'

4
TI
Infectious complications following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: an automated surveillance system for detecting postprocedure bacteremia.
AU
Anderson DJ, Shimpi RA, McDonald JR, Branch MS, Kanafani ZA, Harger J, Ely TM, Sexton DJ, Kaye KS
SO
Am J Infect Control. 2008;36(8):592.
 
We have developed an automated surveillance system to detect bloodstream infection (BSI) occurring after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We retrospectively applied this automated surveillance tool to all patients who underwent ERCP at out institution between July 2004 and April 2006 to determine the baseline rates of BSI after ERCP and identify the epidemiology of the pathogens. A total of 2052 ERCPs were performed during the study period; 46 BSIs occurred within 30 days after ERCP (overall rate of post-ERCP BSI, 2.24/100 procedures). The most commonly isolated organisms were Enterobacteriaceae (n = 18; 29%) and enterococci (n = 14; 22%). Because invasive procedures are performed in various outpatient and inpatient settings, novel methods are needed to conduct effective surveillance for infection.
AD
Division of Infectious Diseases, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA. deverick.anderson@duke.edu
PMID
5
TI
Prospective assessment of the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in ERCP.
AU
Llach J, Bordas JM, Almela M, PelliséM, Mata A, Soria M, Fernández-Esparrach G, Ginès A, Elizalde JI, Feu F, PiquéJM
SO
Hepatogastroenterology. 2006;53(70):540.
 
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Despite the existence of published recommendations, various studies of antibiotic prophylaxis have reached conflicting conclusions, and controversy exists regarding the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in ERCP. The aim of this study was to analyze the efficacy of the intramuscular administration of clindamicine and gentamicine before ERCP.
METHODOLOGY: Sixty-one consecutive patients referred for ERCP were prospectively randomized to receive either clindamicine 600mg and gentamicine 80mg, both intramuscularly one hour before the ERCP (group I; 31 patients) or not (group II; 30 patients). Two blood samples were obtained from every patient (just before endoscopy and within 5 minutes of withdrawal of the endoscope) and were incubated for 7 days and examined daily for growth of bacteria. Patients were closely monitored for 7 days after endoscopy to detect the development of infectious complications.
RESULTS: Only 7 cultures from 7 patients were positive. Four were obtained post-ERCP (two patients in group I and two in group II) and the remaining three before endoscopy. The post-ERCP isolated bacteria were: Streptococcus mitis, Peptoestreptococcus anaerobious, Moraxella spp and Escherichia coli. Two patients, one from each group, developed post-ERCP cholangitis that were solved with medical treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that ERCP induce bacteremia in a small group of patients and suggest that prophylactic administration of clindamicine plus gentamicine does not reduce the incidence of bacteremia and cholangitis, and do not support the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics prior to ERCP.
AD
Endoscopy Unit, Institut Clinic de Malalties Digestives, and Microbiology Department, Hospital Clinic i Provincial, IDIBAPS, Spain. jllach@clinic.ub.es
PMID