A NATIONAL SURVEY SHOWS A DILEMMA TOWARDS SBP PROPHYLAXIS AMONG US-BASED HEPATOLOGY PROFESSIONALS.

IF 3 3区医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY

Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2025-05-13 DOI:10.14309/ctg.0000000000000858

Deborah DiazGranados, Jacqueline G O'Leary, Madhumita Yamuzala, Shari Rogal, Jasmohan S Bajaj

{"title":"A NATIONAL SURVEY SHOWS A DILEMMA TOWARDS SBP PROPHYLAXIS AMONG US-BASED HEPATOLOGY PROFESSIONALS.","authors":"Deborah DiazGranados, Jacqueline G O'Leary, Madhumita Yamuzala, Shari Rogal, Jasmohan S Bajaj","doi":"10.14309/ctg.0000000000000858","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prophylaxis (SBPPr)-related practices are evolving, with recent studies showing almost half of potential subjects not being initiated on it.Aim: Determine practice dilemmas regarding SBPPr among US-based hepatology providers.Method: A questionnaire regarding primary and secondary SBPPr using quantitative and qualitative (open-ended) approaches was sent to US-based hepatology providers electronically.Results: 113 clinicians (86% physicians, 73% academic centers) responded. 54% started Primary and 72% secondary SBPPr in 50% of eligible patients. However, the issues related to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and ineffectiveness lead to SBPPr usage variations and restrictions on a patient-specific basis. Most respondents (>70%) would withdraw/not initiate SBPPr with data regarding ineffectiveness and harms. Open-ended answers showed that most believed newer trials to reduce reliance on weaker older evidence are needed.Conclusion: A survey of US-based hepatologists demonstrates a major dilemma between usual care of initiating SBPPr versus not initiating/withdrawing SBPPr that needs newer randomized trials.","PeriodicalId":10278,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14309/ctg.0000000000000858","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prophylaxis (SBPPr)-related practices are evolving, with recent studies showing almost half of potential subjects not being initiated on it.

Aim: Determine practice dilemmas regarding SBPPr among US-based hepatology providers.

Method: A questionnaire regarding primary and secondary SBPPr using quantitative and qualitative (open-ended) approaches was sent to US-based hepatology providers electronically.

Results: 113 clinicians (86% physicians, 73% academic centers) responded. 54% started Primary and 72% secondary SBPPr in 50% of eligible patients. However, the issues related to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and ineffectiveness lead to SBPPr usage variations and restrictions on a patient-specific basis. Most respondents (>70%) would withdraw/not initiate SBPPr with data regarding ineffectiveness and harms. Open-ended answers showed that most believed newer trials to reduce reliance on weaker older evidence are needed.

Conclusion: A survey of US-based hepatologists demonstrates a major dilemma between usual care of initiating SBPPr versus not initiating/withdrawing SBPPr that needs newer randomized trials.

查看原文本刊更多论文

一项全国性的调查显示了美国肝病专业人员对收缩压预防的两难选择。

背景：自发性细菌性腹膜炎预防（SBPPr）相关实践正在发展，最近的研究显示，几乎一半的潜在受试者没有开始进行预防。目的：确定美国肝病学提供者关于SBPPr的实践困境。方法：采用定量和定性（开放式）方法，将一份关于原发性和继发性SBPPr的问卷以电子方式发送给美国肝病学提供者。结果：113名临床医生（86%的内科医生，73%的学术中心）做出了回应。在50%的符合条件的患者中，54%开始了原发性SBPPr治疗，72%开始了继发性SBPPr治疗。然而，与抗菌素耐药性（AMR）和无效相关的问题导致SBPPr在患者特定基础上的使用变化和限制。大多数受访者（约70%）会撤回/不启动SBPPr，因为有数据表明其无效和危害。开放式回答显示，大多数人认为需要新的试验来减少对较弱的旧证据的依赖。结论：美国肝病学家的一项调查表明，在常规治疗中启动SBPPr与不启动/撤回SBPPr之间存在一个主要的困境，需要更新的随机试验。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-

CiteScore

7.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

114

审稿时长

16 weeks

期刊介绍： Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology (CTG), published on behalf of the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), is a peer-reviewed open access online journal dedicated to innovative clinical work in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology. CTG hopes to fulfill an unmet need for clinicians and scientists by welcoming novel cohort studies, early-phase clinical trials, qualitative and quantitative epidemiologic research, hypothesis-generating research, studies of novel mechanisms and methodologies including public health interventions, and integration of approaches across organs and disciplines. CTG also welcomes hypothesis-generating small studies, methods papers, and translational research with clear applications to human physiology or disease. Colon and small bowel Endoscopy and novel diagnostics Esophagus Functional GI disorders Immunology of the GI tract Microbiology of the GI tract Inflammatory bowel disease Pancreas and biliary tract Liver Pathology Pediatrics Preventative medicine Nutrition/obesity Stomach.