Incidence of bacteremia following upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and biopsy in healthy dogs before, during, and after treatment with omeprazole

Katherine R. Jones Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61802.

Search for other papers by Katherine R. Jones in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MS
,
Carol W. Maddox Department of Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61802.

Search for other papers by Carol W. Maddox in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD
,
Marcella D. Ridgway Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61802.

Search for other papers by Marcella D. Ridgway in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 VMD, MS
,
Stuart C. Clark-Price Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61802.

Search for other papers by Stuart C. Clark-Price in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MS
, and
Olivier Dossin Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61802.

Search for other papers by Olivier Dossin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD

Abstract

Objective—To determine the incidence of bacteremia, as detected by routine methods for bacterial culture of blood samples, following routine endoscopic biopsy of the stomach and duodenum in healthy research dogs and to determine whether treatment with omeprazole administration affected the incidence of bacteremia.

Animals—8 healthy purpose-bred research dogs.

Procedures—All dogs underwent gastroduodenoscopy with biopsy at 4 points: twice prior to treatment with omeprazole, once following 15 days of omeprazole treatment (20 mg, PO, q 12 h), and once 14 days after treatment ceased. Dogs had a mean ± SD body weight of 18.6 ± 2.0 kg. Blood samples were aseptically obtained at 3 points during each procedure (before, immediately following, and 24 hours after endoscopy), and routine aerobic and anaerobic bacterial culture of blood was performed.

Results—96 cultures were attempted for each culture method, yielding positive results of aerobic culture for 2 dogs at separate time points and no positive results of anaerobic culture.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Routine gastrointestinal endoscopy with biopsy in healthy dogs did not result in a detectable bacteremia in most dogs. Treatment with the gastric acid–suppressing medication omeprazole did not affect the incidence of bacteremia as detected via standard techniques.

Abstract

Objective—To determine the incidence of bacteremia, as detected by routine methods for bacterial culture of blood samples, following routine endoscopic biopsy of the stomach and duodenum in healthy research dogs and to determine whether treatment with omeprazole administration affected the incidence of bacteremia.

Animals—8 healthy purpose-bred research dogs.

Procedures—All dogs underwent gastroduodenoscopy with biopsy at 4 points: twice prior to treatment with omeprazole, once following 15 days of omeprazole treatment (20 mg, PO, q 12 h), and once 14 days after treatment ceased. Dogs had a mean ± SD body weight of 18.6 ± 2.0 kg. Blood samples were aseptically obtained at 3 points during each procedure (before, immediately following, and 24 hours after endoscopy), and routine aerobic and anaerobic bacterial culture of blood was performed.

Results—96 cultures were attempted for each culture method, yielding positive results of aerobic culture for 2 dogs at separate time points and no positive results of anaerobic culture.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Routine gastrointestinal endoscopy with biopsy in healthy dogs did not result in a detectable bacteremia in most dogs. Treatment with the gastric acid–suppressing medication omeprazole did not affect the incidence of bacteremia as detected via standard techniques.

Contributor Notes

Dr. Dossin's present address is Department of Clinical Sciences and Clinical Research Unit, National Veterinary School of Toulouse, 31076 Toulouse cedex, France.

Supported by the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Illinois.

Presented in abstract form at the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine Forum, Anaheim, Calif, June 2010.

The authors thank Dr. Didier Concordet for help with statistics and Angela Otto and Megan Miller for technical assistance.

Address correspondence to Dr. Dossin (o.dossin@envt.fr).
  • 1. Leib MS, Baechtel MS, Monroe WE. Complications associated with 355 flexible colonoscopic procedures in dogs. J Vet Intern Med 2004; 18: 642646.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2. Gianella P, Pfammatter NS, Burgener IA. Oesophageal and gastric endoscopic foreign body removal: complications and follow-up of 102 dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2009; 50: 649654.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3. Bissett SA, Davis J, Subler K, et al. Risk factors and outcome of bougienage for treatment of benign esophageal strictures in dogs and cats: 28 cases (1995–2004). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2009; 235: 844850.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4. Mellow MH, Lewis RJ. Endoscopy-related bacteremia. Incidence of positive blood cultures after endoscopy of upper gastrointestinal tract. Arch Intern Med 1976; 136: 667669.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5. Linnemann C, Weisman E, Wenger J. Blood cultures following endoscopy of the esophagus and stomach. South Med J 1971; 64:1055.

  • 6. Baltch AL, Buhac I, Agrawal A, et al. Bacteremia after upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Arch Intern Med 1977; 137: 594597.

  • 7. Shorvon PJ, Eykyn SJ, Cotton PB. Gastrointestinal instrumentation, bacteraemia, and endocarditis. Gut 1983; 24: 10781093.

  • 8. Schembre D, Bjorkman DJ. Review article: endoscopy-related infections. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1993; 7: 347355.

  • 9. Banerjee S, Shen B, Baron TH, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis for GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 791798.

  • 10. Bersenas AM, Mathews KA, Allen DG, et al. Effects of ranitidine, famotidine, pantoprazole, and omeprazole on intragastric pH in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2005; 66: 425431.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11. Tolbert K, Bisset S, King A, et al. Efficacy of oral famotidine and 2 omeprazole formulations for the control of intragastric pH in dogs. J Vet Intern Med 2011; 25: 4754.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12. Laheij RJ, Sturkenboom MC, Hassing RJ, et al. Risk of community-acquired pneumonia and use of gastric acid-suppressive drugs. JAMA 2004; 292: 19551960.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13. Bowen A, Newman A, Estivariz C, et al. Role of acid-suppressing medications during a sustained outbreak of Salmonella enteritidis infection in a long-term care facility. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007; 28: 12021205.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14. Gulmez SE, Holm A, Frederiksen H, et al. Use of proton pump inhibitors and the risk of community-acquired pneumonia: a population-based case-control study. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167: 950955.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15. Canani RB, Cirillo P, Roggero P, et al. Therapy with gastric acidity inhibitors increases the risk of acute gastroenteritis and community-acquired pneumonia in children. Pediatrics 2006; 117:e817e820.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. Fried M, Siegrist H, Frei R, et al. Duodenal bacterial overgrowth during treatment in outpatients with omeprazole. Gut 1994; 35: 2326.

  • 17. Thorens J, Froehlich F, Schwizer W, et al. Bacterial overgrowth during treatment with omeprazole compared with cimetidine: a prospective randomised double blind study. Gut 1996; 39: 5459.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18. Tennant SM, Hartland EL, Phumoonna T, et al. Influence of gastric acid on susceptibility to infection with ingested bacterial pathogens. Infect Immun 2008; 76: 639645.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19. Garcia-Mazcorro JF, Suchodolski JS, Jones KR, et al. Effect of the proton pump inhibitor omeprazole on the gastrointestinal bacterial microbiota on healthy dogs. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2012; 80: 624636.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20. Greiner M, Wolf G, Hartmann K. A retrospective study of the clinical presentation of 140 dogs and 39 cats with bacteraemia. J Small Anim Pract 2008; 49: 378389.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21. Meurs KM, Atkins CE, DeFrancesco TC, et al. Comparison of polymerase chain reaction with bacterial 16s primers to blood culture to identify bacteremia in dogs with suspected endocarditis. J Vet Intern Med 2011; 25: 959962.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22. Wilson ML. Blood cultures. Introduction. Clin Lab Med 1994; 14: 17.

  • 23. Weinstein MP. Clinical importance of blood cultures. Clin Lab Med 1994; 14: 916.

  • 24. Gonsalves WI, Cornish N, Moore M, et al. Effects of volume and site of blood draw on blood culture results. J Clin Microbiol 2009; 47: 34823485.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement