ABSTRACT
To evaluate the clinical value of a new method of guide wire extraction and single reverse-α fixation with short nasobiliary duct for oronasal conversion and fixation, patients who underwent endoscopic nasobiliary drainage in Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University from January to August 2022 were selected. They were randomly divided into guide wire extraction and single reverse-α fixation with short nasobiliary duct group (the observation group, n=145) and guide wire taking and reverse-α fixation group (the control group, n=71). The operation time, one-time operation success rate, adverse events, comfort and satisfaction between the two groups were compared. The operation time in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group [102 ( 91, 117) s VS 136 (127, 145) s, Z=-9.639, P<0.001]. The one-time operation success rate in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group [88.28% (128/145) VS 67.61% (48/71), χ2=13.496], the nasopharynx stimulation score [1 (1, 2) VS 2 (1, 2), Z=-4.457] and adverse events incidence [4.14% (6/145) VS 15.49% (11/71), χ2=8.475] in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group ( P<0.05). During the indwelling of nasobiliary duct, the bile drainage volume (179.45±81.54 mL VS 142.89±55.69 mL, t=3.407) and nursing satisfaction score (7.72±0.99 VS 6.06±1.07, t=11.337) in the observation group were higher than those in the control group, and the comfort score (3.00±1.01 VS 4.83±0.99, t=-12.642) and incidence of adverse events [3.45% (5/145) VS 14.08% (10/71), χ2=8.344] in the observation group were lower than those in the control group ( P<0.05). The operation time of nasobiliary duct removal in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (9.00±1.14 s VS 11.93±1.36 s, t=-16.616, P<0.001). In conclusion, the guide wire extraction and single reverse-α fixation with short nasobiliary duct for nasobiliary oronasal conversion and fixation in endoscopic nasobiliary drainage has the advantages of simple operation, small irritation response and low complication incidence, which is worth of clinical promotion.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Given the characteristic procedures involved in the endoscopy unit, the spread of pathogens is much more frequent in this unit than in other environments. However, there is a lack of data elucidating the existence of pathogens in the endoscopy unit. The aim of this study was to detect the presence of possible pathogens in the endoscopy unit. METHODS: We performed environmental culture using samples from the endoscopy rooms of 2 tertiary hospitals. We used sterile cotton-tipped swabs moistened with sterile saline to swab the surfaces of 197 samples. Then, we cultured the swab in blood agar plate. Samples from the colonoscopy room were placed in thioglycollate broth to detect the presence of anaerobes. After 2 weeks of culture period, we counted the colony numbers. RESULTS: The most commonly contaminated spots were the doctor's keyboard, nurse's cart, and nurse's mouse. The common organisms found were non-pathogenic bacterial microorganisms Staphylococcus, Micrococcus, and Streptococcus spp.. No definite anaerobe organism was detected in the colonoscopy room. CONCLUSIONS: Although the organisms detected in the endoscopy unit were mainly non-pathogenic organisms, they might cause opportunistic infections in immunocompromised patients. Therefore, the environment of the endoscopy room should be managed appropriately; moreover, individual hand hygiene is important for preventing possible hospital-acquired infections.