Association Between Bacterial Colonization and Stent Occlusion in Plastic Biliary Stents

Naglaa Ramadan, Muhammad Abdel Gaffar, Sarah Atef, Naglaa Abdelrhman, Michael Moris, Tamer El-Azab
{"title":"Association Between Bacterial Colonization and Stent Occlusion in Plastic Biliary Stents","authors":"Naglaa Ramadan, Muhammad Abdel Gaffar, Sarah Atef, Naglaa Abdelrhman, Michael Moris, Tamer El-Azab","doi":"10.21608/bmfj.2023.250015.1959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Background: Biliary stent occlusion is a significant clinical concern with potentially severe consequences for patients. This study aimed to evaluate common microorganisms detected by culture from plastic biliary stents, assess their association with stent occlusion, and evaluate their antimicrobial sensitivity. Methods: Forty patients with plastic biliary stents were included in this study. They were divided into two groups: Group (I) 20 patients with clinical signs of stent occlusion and Group (II) 20 patients scheduled for stent extraction within three months after placement. Various clinical, laboratory, and imaging assessments were conducted. The plastic stents were extracted and subjected to microbiological culture to identify aerobic and anaerobic organisms, followed by antimicrobial sensitivity testing. Results: Patients in Group (I) exhibited a higher prevalence of clinical symptoms indicative of stent occlusion, abnormal vital signs, and elevated laboratory parameters (TLC, ESR, CRP, Total Bilirubin., Direct Bilirubin, ALP, ALT, AST, PT, INR and creatinine) compared to Group (II). Microbiological analysis revealed the presence of various organisms, with Klebsiella sp, Proteus, Pseudomonas, and E. coli being the most common. Sensitivity and resistance to antibiotics varied among these microorganisms. Conclusion: Klebsiella was prevalent in stent occlusion (65%), while Proteus dominated non-occlusion (60%). No anaerobic organisms were found. Amikacin, Meropenem, and Imipenem showed the highest sensitivity of microbes in patient with stent occlusion, and Meropenem, Colistin, and Imipenem the highest sensitivity of microbes in patient with non-stent occlusion. Both groups exhibited 100% resistance to various antibiotics.","PeriodicalId":503219,"journal":{"name":"Benha Medical Journal","volume":"14 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Benha Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/bmfj.2023.250015.1959","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

: Background: Biliary stent occlusion is a significant clinical concern with potentially severe consequences for patients. This study aimed to evaluate common microorganisms detected by culture from plastic biliary stents, assess their association with stent occlusion, and evaluate their antimicrobial sensitivity. Methods: Forty patients with plastic biliary stents were included in this study. They were divided into two groups: Group (I) 20 patients with clinical signs of stent occlusion and Group (II) 20 patients scheduled for stent extraction within three months after placement. Various clinical, laboratory, and imaging assessments were conducted. The plastic stents were extracted and subjected to microbiological culture to identify aerobic and anaerobic organisms, followed by antimicrobial sensitivity testing. Results: Patients in Group (I) exhibited a higher prevalence of clinical symptoms indicative of stent occlusion, abnormal vital signs, and elevated laboratory parameters (TLC, ESR, CRP, Total Bilirubin., Direct Bilirubin, ALP, ALT, AST, PT, INR and creatinine) compared to Group (II). Microbiological analysis revealed the presence of various organisms, with Klebsiella sp, Proteus, Pseudomonas, and E. coli being the most common. Sensitivity and resistance to antibiotics varied among these microorganisms. Conclusion: Klebsiella was prevalent in stent occlusion (65%), while Proteus dominated non-occlusion (60%). No anaerobic organisms were found. Amikacin, Meropenem, and Imipenem showed the highest sensitivity of microbes in patient with stent occlusion, and Meropenem, Colistin, and Imipenem the highest sensitivity of microbes in patient with non-stent occlusion. Both groups exhibited 100% resistance to various antibiotics.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
塑料胆道支架的细菌定植与支架闭塞之间的关系
:背景:胆道支架闭塞是一个重要的临床问题,可能会给患者带来严重后果。本研究旨在评估通过培养从塑料胆道支架中检测到的常见微生物,评估它们与支架闭塞的关系,并评估它们的抗菌敏感性。研究方法本研究共纳入 40 名使用塑料胆道支架的患者。他们被分为两组:第一组:20 名有支架闭塞临床症状的患者;第二组:20 名计划在支架植入后三个月内取出支架的患者。对他们进行了各种临床、实验室和成像评估。提取塑料支架并进行微生物培养,以确定需氧菌和厌氧菌,然后进行抗菌药敏感性测试。结果与(II)组相比,(I)组患者出现支架闭塞临床症状、生命体征异常和实验室指标(TLC、ESR、CRP、总胆红素、直接胆红素、ALP、ALT、AST、PT、INR 和肌酐)升高的比例更高。微生物分析显示存在多种微生物,其中最常见的是克雷伯氏菌、变形杆菌、假单胞菌和大肠杆菌。这些微生物对抗生素的敏感性和耐药性各不相同。结论克雷伯氏菌在支架闭塞中很常见(65%),而变形杆菌在非闭塞中占主导地位(60%)。未发现厌氧菌。在支架闭塞患者中,阿米卡星、美罗培南和亚胺培南对微生物的敏感性最高;在非支架闭塞患者中,美罗培南、考利司汀和亚胺培南对微生物的敏感性最高。两组患者对各种抗生素的耐药性均为 100%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Impact of Metabolic Associated Fatty Liver Disease on Health-Related Quality of Life Comparing Fair Control of Hyperglycemia contrary to Intensive Control in Patients after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Procedure Comparison of the Onset Time between 0.25% Bupivacaine and 0.5% Bupivacaine for Ultrasound‑Guided Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Randomized Clinical Trial Intramedullary Nailing Versus Minmally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis (MIPO) in Management of Distal Tibial Fractures Correlation between serum estrogen level and endometrial histology in cases of fibroid uterus in peri-menopausal peroid
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1