Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Feb 7.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Apr 8;68(8):1327–1334. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy683

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Exposure investigation timeline and surveillance results. Patients exposed to the duodenoscope are shown below the timeline, from duodenoscope use during case 1’s (C1) procedure on day 1 through sequestration of the scope on day 16. The following designations were used: C for case-patients; E denoting endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) exposure; R denoting roommate exposure; B indicating bathroom exposure, and N indicating patients identified as unit contacts. An asterisk indicates those patients who either had a stent placed during the ERCP (E3 and E4/C2) or who had an indwelling stent that was left in place following the ERCP (E5). Exposed patients who were identified as cases of mcr-1 are shown in color (orange for case 1 [C1], blue for case 2 [E4/C2]). Secondary exposures to C1 and E4/C2 were identified using a definition of shared environment informed by public health recommendations. Together, these individuals constituted the cohort for the exposure investigation. Exposed patients who were tested and had an mcr-1–negative result are shaded in solid gray. Exposed patients for whom no information was available are shown in hatched gray (eg, patient died or was discharged and lost to follow-up). Of the 7 individuals identified as healthcare-associated contacts of C1, all had been discharged from the hospital to home at the time the investigation was initiated, apart from E4/C2. Of the 26 contacts of E4/C2, 9 had been discharged to home, 13 had been transferred to a long-term acute care hospital or rehabilitation hospital, and 4 had died either in the hospital or since discharge; swabs could not be obtained from 11 of these 26 contacts.