Antimicrobial therapy for acute cholangitis: Tokyo Guidelines.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tanaka A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2784514 | biostudies-other | 2007
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Acute cholecystitis consists of various morbid conditions, ranging from mild cases that are relieved by the oral administration of antimicrobial drugs or that resolve even without antimicrobials to severe cases complicated by biliary peritonitis. Microbial cultures should be performed by collecting bile at all available opportunities to identify both aerobic and anaerobic organisms. Empirically selected antimicrobials should be administered. Antimicrobial activity against potential causative organisms, the severity of the cholecystitis, the patient's past history of antimicrobial therapy, and local susceptibility patterns (antibiogram) must be taken into consideration in the choice of antimicrobial drugs. In mild cases which closely mimic biliary colic, the administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is recommended to prevent the progression of inflammation (recommendation grade A). When causative organisms are identified, the antimicrobial drug should be changed for a narrower-spectrum antimicrobial agent on the basis of the species and their susceptibility testing results.
| S-EPMC2784497 | biostudies-other
Project description:Biliary decompression and drainage done in a timely manner is the cornerstone of acute cholangitis treatment. The mortality rate of acute cholangitis was extremely high when no interventional procedures, other than open drainage, were available. At present, endoscopic drainage is the procedure of first choice, in view of its safety and effectiveness. In patients with severe (grade III) disease, defined according to the severity assessment criteria in the Guidelines, biliary drainage should be done promptly with respiration management, while patients with moderate (grade II) disease also need to undergo drainage promptly with close monitoring of their responses to the primary care. For endoscopic drainage, endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or stent placement procedures are performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported no difference in the drainage effect of these two procedures, but case-series studies have indicated the frequent occurrence of hemorrhage associated with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), and complications such as pancreatitis. Although the usefulness of percutaneous transhepatic drainage is supported by the case-series studies, its lower success rate and higher complication rates makes it a second-option procedure.
| S-EPMC2784512 | biostudies-other
Project description:Biliary drainage is a radical method to relieve cholestasis, a cause of acute cholangitis, and takes a central part in the treatment of acute cholangitis. Emergent drainage is essential for severe cases, whereas patients with moderate and mild disease should also receive drainage as soon as possible if they do not respond to conservative treatment, and their condition has not improved. Biliary drainage can be achieved via three different routes/procedures: endoscopic, percutaneous transhepatic, and open methods. The clinical value of both endoscopic and percutaneous transhepatic drainage is well known. Endoscopic drainage is associated with a low morbidity rate and shorter duration of hospitalization; therefore, this approach is advocated whenever it is applicable. In endoscopic drainage, either endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or tube stent placement can be used. There is no significant difference in the success rate, effectiveness, and morbidity between the two procedures. The decision to perform endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is made based on the patient's condition and the number and diameter of common bile duct stones. Open drainage, on the other hand, should be applied only in patients for whom endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic drainage is contraindicated or has not been successfully performed. Cholecystectomy is recommended in patients with gallbladder stones, following the resolution of acute cholangitis with medical treatment, unless the patient has poor operative risk factors or declines surgery.
| S-EPMC2799047 | biostudies-other
Project description:Diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for acute biliary inflammation/infection (acute cholangitis and acute cholecystitis), according to severity grade, have not yet been established in the world. Therefore we formulated flowcharts for the management of acute biliary inflammation/infection in accordance with severity grade. For mild (grade I) acute cholangitis, medical treatment may be sufficient/appropriate. For moderate (grade II) acute cholangitis, early biliary drainage should be performed. For severe (grade III) acute cholangitis, appropriate organ support such as ventilatory/circulatory management is required. After hemodynamic stabilization is achieved, urgent endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage should be performed. For patients with acute cholangitis of any grade of severity, treatment for the underlying etiology, including endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical treatment should be performed after the patient's general condition has improved. For patients with mild (grade I) cholecystitis, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred treatment. For patients with moderate (grade II) acute cholecystitis, early laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy is preferred. In patients with extensive local inflammation, elective cholecystectomy is recommended after initial management with percutaneous gallbladder drainage and/or cholecystostomy. For the patient with severe (grade III) acute cholecystitis, multiorgan support is a critical part of management. Biliary peritonitis due to perforation of the gallbladder is an indication for urgent cholecystectomy and/or drainage. Delayed elective cholecystectomy may be performed after initial treatment with gallbladder drainage and improvement of the patient's general medical condition.
| S-EPMC2784508 | biostudies-other
Project description:The principal management of acute cholecystitis is early cholecystectomy. However, percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) may be preferable for patients with moderate (grade II) or severe (grade III) acute cholecystitis. For patients with moderate (grade II) disease, PTGBD should be applied only when they do not respond to conservative treatment. For patients with severe (grade III) disease, PTGBD is recommended with intensive care. Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder aspiration (PTGBA) is a simple alternative drainage method with fewer complications; however, its clinical usefulness has been shown only by case-series studies. To clarify the clinical value of these drainage methods, proper randomized trials should be done. This article describes techniques of drainage for acute cholecystitis.
| S-EPMC2784517 | biostudies-other
Project description:Cholecystectomy has been widely performed in the treatment of acute cholecystitis, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been increasingly adopted as the method of surgery over the past 15 years. Despite the success of laparoscopic cholecystectomy as an elective treatment for symptomatic gallstones, acute cholecystitis was initially considered a contraindication for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The reasons for it being considered a contraindication were the technical difficulty of performing it in acute cholecystitis and the development of complications, including bile duct injury, bowel injury, and hepatic injury. However, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is now accepted as being safe for acute cholecystitis, when surgeons who are expert at the laparoscopic technique perform it. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been found to be superior to open cholecystectomy as a treatment for acute cholecystitis because of a lower incidence of complications, shorter length of postoperative hospital stay, quicker recuperation, and earlier return to work. However, laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis has not become routine, because the timing and approach to the surgical management in patients with acute cholecystitis is still a matter of controversy. These Guidelines describe the timing of and the optimal surgical treatment of acute cholecystitis in a question-and-answer format.
| S-EPMC2784499 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAcute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) is the second most frequent surgical condition in emergency departments. The recommended treatment is the early laparoscopic cholecystectomy; however, the Tokyo Guidelines (TG) advocate for different initial treatments in some subgroups of patients without a strong evidence that all patients will benefit from them. There is no clear consensus in the literature about who is the unfit patient for surgical treatment. The primary aim of the study is to identify the risk factors for mortality in ACC and compare them with Tokyo Guidelines (TG) classification.MethodsRetrospective unicentric cohort study of patients emergently admitted with and ACC during 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2016. The study comprised 963 patients. Primary outcome was the mortality after the diagnosis. A propensity score method was used to avoid confounding factors comparing surgical treatment and non-surgical treatment.ResultsThe overall mortality was 3.6%. Mortality was associated with older age (68 + IQR 27 vs. 83 + IQR 5.5; P = 0.001) and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (3.5 + 5.3 vs. 0+2; P = 0.001). A logistic regression model isolated four mortality risk factors (ACME): chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 4.66 95% CI 1.7-12.8 P = 0.001), dementia (OR 4.12; 95% CI 1.34-12.7, P = 0.001), age > 80 years (OR 1.12: 95% CI 1.02-1.21, P = 0.001) and the need of preoperative vasoactive amines (OR 9.9: 95% CI 3.5-28.3, P = 0.001) which predicted the mortality in a 92% of the patients. The receiver operating characteristic curve yielded an area of 88% significantly higher that 68% (P = 0.003) from the TG classification. When comparing subgroups selected using propensity score matching with the same morbidity and severity of ACC, mortality was higher in the non-surgical treatment group. (26.2% vs. 10.5%).ConclusionsMortality was higher in ACC patients treated with non-surgical treatment. ACME identifies high-risk patients. The validation to ACME with a prospective multicenter study population could allow us to create a new alternative guideline to TG for treating ACC.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered and recorded in Clinical Trials. NCT04744441.
| S-EPMC8111736 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Recommendations for the duration of antimicrobial therapy in cholangitis after successful endoscopic biliary drainage vary. The aim of this study was to compare the occurrence of local infectious complications in patients with acute cholangitis treated with antibiotics for 3 days or less compared with 4 days or more. METHODS:We performed a retrospective multicentre study in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients who received a successful biliary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography because of cholangitis due to common bile duct stones between 2012 and 2017 were included. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a local infectious complication within 3 months of endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography. Secondary outcomes included Clostridioides difficile infection, total length of hospital stay and all-cause mortality. RESULTS:A total of 426 patients with cholangitis were identified and 296 patients met all inclusion criteria. Therapy duration was ?3 days in 137 patients (46.3%). During follow-up, 41 patients (13.9%) developed a local infectious complication. Occurrence of infectious complications did not differ between the two groups (p?=?0.32). No patient developed Clostridioides difficile infection. Median hospital stay was 6 days (interquartile range 4-8 days) in the short antibiotic group compared with 7 days (interquartile range 5-9 days) in the long group (p?=?0.03). Four (1.4%) patients died during follow-up, all were treated for ?4 days (p?=?0.13). CONCLUSIONS:Antimicrobial therapy of 3 days or less seems to be sufficient after successful biliary drainage in patients with acute cholangitis. Randomized trials should confirm our findings.
| S-EPMC7226689 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Although the number of resistant bacteria tends to increase with prolonged antimicrobial therapy, no studies have examined the relationship between the duration of antimicrobial therapy and increase in the number of resistant bacteria in acute cholangitis. We hypothesized that the short-term administration of antimicrobial agents in acute cholangitis would suppress bacterial resistance. Patients and methods This was a single-center, retrospective, observational study of patients with acute cholangitis admitted between January 2018 and June 2020 who met the following criteria: successful biliary drainage, positive blood or bile cultures, bacteria identified from cultures sensitive to antimicrobials, and subsequent cholangitis recurrence by January 2022. The patients were divided into two groups: those whose causative organisms at the time of recurrence became resistant to the antimicrobial agents used at the time of initial admission (resistant group) and those who remained susceptible (susceptible group). Multivariate analysis was used to examine risk factors associated with the development of resistant pathogens. Multivariate analysis investigated antibiotics used with the length of 3 days or shorter after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and previously reported risk factors for the development of bacterial resistance. Results In total, 89 eligible patients were included in this study. There were no significant differences in patient background or ERCP findings between the groups. The use of antibiotics, completed within 3 days after ERCP, was associated with a lower risk of developing bacterial resistance (odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.65; P =0.01). Conclusions In acute cholangitis, the administration of antimicrobials within 3 days of ERCP may suppress the development of resistant bacteria.
| S-EPMC10901644 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Severe acute malnutrition (SAM) affects nearly 20 million children worldwide and is responsible for up to 1 million deaths per year in children under the age of 5 years. Current WHO guidelines recommend oral amoxicillin for children with uncomplicated malnutrition and parenteral benzylpenicillin and gentamicin for those with complicated malnutrition. Because of cost pressures and increasing antimicrobial resistance, the administration of empirical antibiotics for children with SAM has recently been debated. Methods A systematic review of the current published literature was undertaken to assess the efficacy, safety, cost-effectiveness and pharmacokinetics of antimicrobial treatment of children with SAM in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Results The initial search found 712 papers, eight of which met the inclusion criteria. Quality assessment of the studies was performed as per the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines. International guidelines and clinical data registries were also reviewed which identified inconsistencies in current first- and second-line therapies and dosing regimens. Conclusion Current evidence supports the continued use of broad-spectrum oral amoxicillin for treating children with uncomplicated SAM as outpatients. There is no strong evidence to justify changing the current parenteral therapy guidelines for children admitted with complicated SAM, although they should be clarified to harmonise the dosage regimen of amoxicillin for the treatment of SAM to 40 mg/kg twice daily, and to continue parenteral antimicrobials beyond 2 days if indicated by the clinical condition.
| S-EPMC5972636 | biostudies-literature