Assessing Antibiotic Adherence and Improving Antibiotic Stewardship in Common Interventional Radiology Procedures

PurposeIn 2018, The Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology (JVIR) updated its guidelines regarding periprocedural antibiotics. However, some institutions are slower to adopt these new guidelines. Additionally, antibiotic-resistant bacteria and sepsis are serious concerns due in part to incorrect usage of antibiotics. The purpose of this study is to assess institutional adherence to 2018 JVIR guidelines for the purpose of improving antibiotic stewardship.Materials and methodsA total of 800 cases over a 10-month time period were retrospectively identified and charted following the release of guidelines. Inclusion criteria for the study were adults aged 21 years or older undergoing mediport placement, tunneled central line (TCL) placement, nephrostomy tube exchange, percutaneous biliary drain, or cholecystostomy tube exchange. Exclusion criteria included immunocompromised and pregnant individuals as 2018 guidelines may not fit these patient populations. Guideline adherence for each procedure was recorded as a percentage; the timing of the antibiotic usage was also recorded and compared to the guidelines (within 60 minutes before incision).ResultsIn total, 49 mediport placements, 118 tunneled central line placements – 44 hemodialysis (HD) catheters and 74 nonhemodialysis (non-HD) catheters, 100 nephrostomy exchanges, and 82 biliary tube exchanges were included. Antibiotics were used in 83.6% (41/49) of mediport patients, 11.3% (5/44) of non-HD TCL patients, 20.5% (15/74) of HD TCL patients, 55% (55/100) nephrostomy tube changes, and 65.4% (55/84) of biliary or cholecystostomy tube exchanges. Out of those given prophylaxis, guideline-recommended antibiotics were used in 100% (41/41) of mediport, 100% (20/20) of TCL (both HD and non-HD catheters), 9% (5/55) of nephrostomy tube exchanges, and 1.8% (1/55) of biliary tube exchanges. Guideline-recommended timing was followed in 75.3% across all cases (ranging from 72.2% in mediports to 79.3% in biliary exchanges).ConclusionThis study of antibiotic practices at a single university-based academic institution revealed that antibiotic usage is not fully up to date with 2018 guidelines. For mediports, non-HD TCL placements, and nephrostomy tube exchanges, institutional changes should be made to reduce periprocedural antibiotic use, as antibiotics are no longer recommended for these procedures. For HD TCL and biliary exchanges, proper adherence to recommended prophylactic antibiotics should be followed. In addition, education about the correct antibiotic timing should be emphasized to increase compliance with guidelines.     

Atypical Abnormal Pulmonary Vein Drainage with Atrial Septal Defect: Surgical Treatment

Sinus venosus atrial septal defect (SV‐ASD) usually coexists with partial anomalous pulmonary vein connection (PAPVC). It is a difficult diagnosis in transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) due to eccentric position of defects. We present a rare case of atypical anatomical variation in PAPVC, which was never described before. Two right pulmonary veins drained into superior vena cava, which overrode SV‐ASD and interatrial septum, a third pulmonary vein into the right atrium. Complete diagnosis could not be set after TTE, nor transesophageal echocardiography, whereas angio‐CT was finally conclusive. This diagnostic approach allowed the surgical planning.     

Reduced nontarget embolization and increased targeted delivery with a reflux-control microcatheter in a swine model

PurposeTo evaluate the potential differences in non-target embolization and vessel microsphere filling of a reflux-control microcatheter (RCM) compared to a standard end-hole microcatheter (SEHM) in a swine model.Materials and methodsRadiopaque microspheres were injected with both RCM and SEHM (2.4-Fr and 2.7-Fr) in the kidneys of a preclinical swine model. Transarterial renal embolization procedures with RCM or SEHM were performed in both kidneys of 14 pigs. Renal arteries were selectively embolized with an automated injection protocol of radio-opaque microspheres. Ex-vivo X-ray microtomography images of the kidneys were utilized to evaluate the embolization by quantification of the deposition of injected microspheres in the target vs. the non-target area of injection. X-ray microtomography images were blindly analyzed by five interventional radiologists. The degree of vessel filling and the non-target embolization were quantified using a scale from 1 to 5 for each parameter. An analysis of variance was used to compare the paired scores.ResultsTotal volumes of radio-opaque microspheres injected were similar for RCM (11.5 ± 3.6 [SD] mL; range: 6–17 mL) and SEHM (10.6 ± 5.2 [SD] mL; range: 4–19 mL) (P = 0.38). The voxels enhanced ratio in the target (T) vs. non-target (NT) areas was greater with RCM (T = 98.3% vs. NT = 1.7%) than with SEHM (T = 89% vs. NT = 11%) but the difference was not significant (P = 0.30). The total score blindly given by the five interventional radiologists was significantly different between RCM (12.3 ± 2.1 [SD]; range: 6–15) and the standard catheter (11.3 ± 2.5 [SD]; range: 4–15) (P = 0.0073), with a significant decrease of non-target embolization for RCM (3.8 ± 1.3 [SD]; range: 3.5–4.2) compared to SEHM (3.2 ± 1.5 [SD]; range: 2.9–3.5) (P = 0.014).ConclusionIn an animal model, RCM microcatheters reduce the risk of non-target embolization from 11% to 1.7%, increasing the delivery of microspheres of 98% to the target vessels, compared to SEHM microcatheters.     

Clinical profile and one-year outcomes of patients with mural infective endocarditis: – A tertiary care centre study based on data from a seven-year registry

BackgroundInfective endocarditis patients present very rarely with vegetations on the mural endocardium. Only very few studies are available comparing Mural infective endocarditis with commoner valvular or device related infective endocarditis.AimTo analyse the clinical features, microbiological profile and clinical course of mural endocarditis in comparison to valvular endocarditis.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of data from a registry of infective endocarditis. Patients enrolled between April 2012 and April 2019 were included. Patients who were reported to have vegetations on the mural endocardial surface were taken as a group and compared with rest of the patients. Clinical profile, laboratory parameters including culture and outcomes were compared between the two groups.ResultsOut of 278 patients in the study, 15 (5.38%) had vegetations on the mural endocardium. Of them, only 4 patients had structural heart diseases. All the patients with mural endocarditis were NYHA class II or below at presentation. Ventricles were the commonest sites of vegetations. Inflammatory markers like ESR and CRP were low in mural endocarditis compared to rest. Culture positivity was high in mural endocarditis and Staphylococcus Aureus was the commonest organism. Mural endocarditis patients had similar in hospital mortality to rest of the patients. Cardiac complications were not reported in mural endocarditis, but they had similar incidence of embolic complications including neurological events.ConclusionMural endocarditis is a rare clinical entity with similar morbidity and mortality to that of endocarditis with valvular vegetation.