ABSTRACT
Resumen ANTECEDENTES: Las complicaciones infecciosas secundarias a la histeroscopia diagnóstica ambulatoria son bajas (0.6%). CASO CLÍNICO: Paciente de 46 años que a los 6 días posthisteroscopia diagnóstica ambulatoria por pólipos endometriales ingresó al servicio de Ginecología debido a un cuadro de piomiositis del músculo piriforme izquierdo, secundario a bacteriemia por Streptococcus pyogenes luego de un procedimiento ginecológico. Se trató con una dosis subcutánea de 40 mg de enoxaparina al día, y 2 g de ceftriaxona intravenosa cada 24 h, 240 mg de gentamicina intravenosa una vez al día. En las siguientes 48 horas se retiró la gentamicina y se prescribió 1 g de amoxicilina cada 8 h, por vía oral más 300 mg de clindamicina cada 8 h, también por vía oral que la paciente continuó durante 7 días más. En la resonancia magnética de control tomada a los 10 días quedó de manifiesto la tromboflebitis séptica en la vena iliaca interna izquierda y la persistencia del cuadro de piomiositis, con colección pélvica intra y extramuscular. Se decidió reingresarla para tratarla con el siguiente esquema: 1 g de amoxicilina por vía intravenosa cada 8 horas y 900 mg de clindamicina con igual pauta; se suspendió a las 24 h enseguida de la valoración por el infectólogo. Se indicó nuevo tratamiento antitrombótico con 0.5 mL de fraxiparina forte cada 24 horas, por vía subcutánea. El eco-Doppler descartó la trombosis venosa profunda; los hemocultivos que resultaron negativos. La paciente fue dada de alta con prescripción de fraxiparina Forte a dosis de 0.5 mL cada 24 horas durante 6 semanas; la evolución clínica fue favorable. La resonancia magnética de control a los 30 días reportó la desaparición completa del proceso inflamatorio. Luego de un año, la paciente permanece asintomática y continúa en seguimiento médico anual. CONCLUSIONES: La histeroscopia diagnóstica ambulatoria es una técnica eficaz y segura aunque excepcionalmente pueden sobrevenir complicaciones infecciosas derivadas de la técnica. Esto se previene con profilaxis antibiótica. La valoración previa a la histeroscopia es indispensable para advertir factores de riesgo que puedan controlarse o contraindiquen la realización del procedimiento.
Abstract BACKGROUND: Infectious complications due to diagnostic hysteroscopy are uncommon, being only 0.6% of all complications. CLINICAL CASE: A 46-year-old patient who, 6 days after performing an outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy due to endometrial polyps, was admitted to the Gynecology Department, due to pyomyositis of the left piriformis muscle secondary to Streptococcus pyogenes bacteremia after gynecological procedure. Antithrombotic treatment was initiated with Enoxaparin 40 mg, 1/24h subcutaneously and antibiotic therapy with Ceftriaxone 2g/24h intravenously (iv) and Gentamicin 240 mg/24h iv, which 48 hours later were changed to Amoxicillin 1g/8h orally (VO) and Clindamycin 300 mg/8 hours orally for another 7 days. In the 10-day control magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), septic thrombophlebitis was seen in the left internal iliac vein as well as persistence of the pyomyositis condition, with intra and extramuscular pelvic collections. Therefore, a new admission was decided to start antibiotic therapy again with Amoxicillin 1g/8h IV and Clindamycin 900 mg/8h IV, which was suspended 24 hours after assessment by the Infectious Diseases Unit; and new antithrombotic treatment with Fraxiparin Forte 0.5 mL/24h subcutaneous, by consensus with the Vascular Surgery Service. ECO-DOPPLER was performed, which ruled out Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT); and negative blood cultures. The patient was discharged with Fraxiparina Forte 0.5 mL/24h for 6 weeks presenting good clinical evolution. A new MRI control was scheduled for the following month, finding a complete resolution of the inflammatory process. Currently, one year later, the patient is asymptomatic and continues in annual follow-up in our consultations. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy is an effective and safe technique. Infectious complications derived from the technique are infrequent, which is why it is not necessary to perform an antibiotic prophylaxis in patients who are going to undergo this test
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended in acute pancreatitis. According to current international guidelines antibiotics together with further intervention should be considered in the setting of infected necrosis. Appropriate antibiotic therapy particularly avoiding over-prescription is important. This study examines antibiotic use in acute pancreatitis in a tertiary centre using the current IAP/APA guidelines for reference. METHODS: Data were collected on a consecutive series of patients admitted with acute pancreatitis over a 12 month period. Data were dichotomized by patients admitted directly to the centre and tertiary transfers. Information was collected on clinical course with specific reference to antibiotic use, episode severity, intervention and outcome. RESULTS: 111 consecutive episodes of acute pancreatitis constitute the reported population. 31 (28%) were tertiary transfers. Overall 65 (58.5%) patients received antibiotics. Significantly more tertiary transfer patients received antibiotics. Mean person-days of antibiotic use was 23.9 (sd 29.7) days in the overall study group but there was significantly more use in the tertiary transfer group as compared to patients having their index admission to the centre (40.9 sd 37.1 vs 10.2 sd 8.9; P < 0.005). Thirty four (44%) of patients with clinically mild acute pancreatitis received antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial use of antibiotics in acute pancreatitis, in particular in patients with severe disease. Over-use is seen in mild acute pancreatitis. Better consideration must be given to identification of prophylaxis or therapy as indication. In relation to repeated courses of antibiotics in severe disease there must be clear indications for use.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Pancreatitis/drug therapy , Acute Disease , Administration, Intravenous , Cohort Studies , Drug Utilization/statistics & numerical data , Endoscopy , Female , Guideline Adherence , Humans , Inappropriate Prescribing , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Male , Pancreatitis/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatitis/surgery , Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing/drug therapy , Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing/surgery , Patient Transfer , Tertiary Care Centers , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Determinados procedimentos odontológicos podem causar bacteremia transitória. Pacientes com condições cardíacas de risco podem desenvolver endocardite infecciosa. Há décadas a American Heart Association (AHA) estabelece recomendações sobre procedimentos odontológicos e condições cardíacas de risco para endocardite, as quais devem receber profilaxia antibiótica. O propósito desta revisão foi descrever a evolução das alterações e divulgar as novas recomendações da AHA para a prevenção da endocardite infecciosa, publicadas em 2007.
Some dental procedures can cause transient bacteremia that in patients with risk cardiac conditions can evolve to infective endocarditis. For decades the American Heart Association (AHA) has been establishing recommendations about the dental procedures and cardiac conditions that bring risk for infective endocarditis, which must receive antibiotic prophylaxis. The purpose of this study is to describe the evolution of the changes and disseminate the new recommendations by the AHAfor the prevention of infective endocarditis which was published in 2007.
