De-escalation antimicrobial chemotherapy in critically III patients: pros and cons.

In spite of advances in critical care, nosocomial infections still have a considerable impact on Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, mortality and costs. Several authors suggest that antibiotic therapy should be instituted as soon as sepsis is suspected in critically patients. Over the last two decades the rates of occurrence for pathogens have significantly changed under selective pressure from broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy. Shifts from predominance of gram-negative to gram-positive organisms and outbreaks of resistant pathogens address the need for appropriate empirical regimens. Agents such as ceftazidime, imipenem and, more recently, meropenem and tazobactam have been used successfully as monotherapy. Two different clinical trials have reported that meropenem monotherapy is significantly more effective than ceftazidime-based therapy. Because of the outbreak of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis, some investigators suggest adding a glycopeptide to beta-lactamase inhibitor and carbapenem as initial empirical therapy. Such a regimen should be administered before definitive proof of infections and until the results of microbial investigation are available (de-escalation antimicrobial chemotherapy). On the other hand, several authors do not recommend glycopeptide administration in an attempt to limit nosocomial outbreaks of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and staphylococci (VRS) and to avoid secondary drawbacks, such as nephrotoxicity and ototoxicity. De-escalation antimicrobial chemotherapy should be tailored to critically ill patients according to their clinical status, severity of illness and suspicion of sepsis or nosocomial pneumonia.

Endoscopy in the treatment of benign biliary strictures.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Operative endoscopy is now the method of choice for treating numerous biliary tree diseases. In the treatment of benign strictures of the biliary tree, endoscopy serves as an alternative to surgical interventions. We evaluated the efficacy of endoscopic biliary stents in the treatment of benign biliary strictures. PATIENTS: Fifty-three consecutive patients with benign strictures of the biliary tree underwent endoscopic placement of one or more 10-12 Fr endoprostheses. Thirty-nine patients (73.6%) had iatrogenic strictures and 14 had inflammatory strictures (in 8 patients due to gallstones and in 6, chronic pancreatitis). Of the 53 patients, 20 (37.7%) had strictures classified as Bismuth type I, 23 (43.3%) Bismuth type II, 7 (13.2%) Bismuth type III and 3 (5.7%) Bismuth type IV. RESULTS: None of the patients died during the study period; three patients (5.6%) had immediate endoscopy-related complications treated conservatively. Late complications developed in 47.1% of the patients: 11.3% had cholangitis amenable to medical therapy, 5.6% had dislodged endoprostheses and 30.2% had obstructed endoprostheses. The reason why blocked stents accounted for most of the long-term complications in this series was that endoprostheses were not changed electively: they were changed only when clinical and laboratory signs indicated obstruction. Follow-up (6-84 months) in 42 of the 56 patients. 20 after stent removal, showed that 71.4% had an excellent outcome, 14.3% good results and 14.3% needed surgery. CONCLUSION: In benign biliary stricture endoscopic stenting is the first approach, providing definitive treatment or preparing patients for surgery.