胆汁酸隔离剂和抗生素治疗急性袋炎的比较效果:来自美国的一项匹配队列研究。

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Saqr Alsakarneh, Michael Camilleri, Francis A Farraye, Jana G Hashash
{"title":"胆汁酸隔离剂和抗生素治疗急性袋炎的比较效果:来自美国的一项匹配队列研究。","authors":"Saqr Alsakarneh, Michael Camilleri, Francis A Farraye, Jana G Hashash","doi":"10.1007/s10620-025-09039-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Bile acid sequestrants (BAS) are an emerging option for treatment of pouchitis. We aimed to compare BAS monotherapy, antibiotics, and combination therapy with both in the treatment of pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the US-Collaborative TriNetX database to identify patients with acute pouchitis and UC. Treatment groups were divided into BAS (cholestyramine, colesevelam, colestipol), antibiotics (ciprofloxacin and/or metronidazole), and combination therapy of both BAS and antibiotics. Primary outcomes were failure of initial therapy (early relapse or nonresponse) and the development of recurrent pouchitis in the first 12 months after an initial episode of pouchitis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis included 1,136 patients (mean age: 37.8 ± 15.4 years, and 45.9% female) of whom 727 (64%) were diagnosed with recurrent pouchitis. After adjusting for confounders by propensity-score matching, there was no significant difference in the odds of early relapse or nonresponse with BAS compared with antibiotic monotherapy (aOR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.40-1.38; p = 0.34) or combination therapy (aOR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.47-1.88; p = 0.86). Patients treated with BAS had a statistically significant lower recurrent pouchitis rate (aHR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.42-0.79; p < 0.001) compared with patients treated with antibiotics. Patients treated with BAS had a statistically significant longer time (median: 225 days) to recurrent pouchitis (p < 0.001) compared to antibiotics (median: 99 days).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Using real-world evidence regarding treatment of pouchitis compared to standard antibiotic therapy, BAS monotherapy was not inferior for initial treatment response and significantly prolonged time to recurrent pouchitis.</p>","PeriodicalId":11378,"journal":{"name":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Effectiveness of Bile Acid Sequestrants and Antibiotics in the Management of Acute Pouchitis: A Matched Cohort Study from the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Saqr Alsakarneh, Michael Camilleri, Francis A Farraye, Jana G Hashash\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10620-025-09039-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Bile acid sequestrants (BAS) are an emerging option for treatment of pouchitis. We aimed to compare BAS monotherapy, antibiotics, and combination therapy with both in the treatment of pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the US-Collaborative TriNetX database to identify patients with acute pouchitis and UC. Treatment groups were divided into BAS (cholestyramine, colesevelam, colestipol), antibiotics (ciprofloxacin and/or metronidazole), and combination therapy of both BAS and antibiotics. Primary outcomes were failure of initial therapy (early relapse or nonresponse) and the development of recurrent pouchitis in the first 12 months after an initial episode of pouchitis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis included 1,136 patients (mean age: 37.8 ± 15.4 years, and 45.9% female) of whom 727 (64%) were diagnosed with recurrent pouchitis. After adjusting for confounders by propensity-score matching, there was no significant difference in the odds of early relapse or nonresponse with BAS compared with antibiotic monotherapy (aOR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.40-1.38; p = 0.34) or combination therapy (aOR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.47-1.88; p = 0.86). Patients treated with BAS had a statistically significant lower recurrent pouchitis rate (aHR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.42-0.79; p < 0.001) compared with patients treated with antibiotics. Patients treated with BAS had a statistically significant longer time (median: 225 days) to recurrent pouchitis (p < 0.001) compared to antibiotics (median: 99 days).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Using real-world evidence regarding treatment of pouchitis compared to standard antibiotic therapy, BAS monotherapy was not inferior for initial treatment response and significantly prolonged time to recurrent pouchitis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Digestive Diseases and Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Digestive Diseases and Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-025-09039-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-025-09039-2","RegionNum":4,"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

摘要

背景和目的:胆汁酸隔离剂(BAS)是治疗袋炎的一种新兴选择。我们的目的是比较BAS单药治疗、抗生素治疗以及两者联合治疗对溃疡性结肠炎(UC)患者回肠袋-肛门吻合术(IPAA)后小囊炎的治疗效果。方法:我们使用美国合作的TriNetX数据库进行了一项回顾性队列研究,以确定急性袋炎和UC患者。治疗组分为BAS(胆甾胺、colesevam、colestipol)、抗生素(环丙沙星和/或甲硝唑)和BAS与抗生素联合治疗组。主要结局是初始治疗失败(早期复发或无反应),以及在初次发作后的12个月内再次发生袋炎。结果:我们的分析纳入了1136例患者(平均年龄:37.8±15.4岁,45.9%为女性),其中727例(64%)诊断为复发性袋炎。通过倾向评分匹配调整混杂因素后,与抗生素单药治疗相比,BAS早期复发或无反应的几率没有显著差异(aOR: 0.74;95% ci: 0.40-1.38;p = 0.34)或联合治疗(aOR: 0.94;95% ci: 0.47-1.88;p = 0.86)。接受BAS治疗的患者复发性眼袋炎发生率有统计学意义(aHR: 0.57;95% ci: 0.42-0.79;结论:与标准抗生素治疗相比,使用真实世界的证据,BAS单药治疗在初始治疗反应方面并不逊色,并且显著延长了复发性眼袋炎的时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Effectiveness of Bile Acid Sequestrants and Antibiotics in the Management of Acute Pouchitis: A Matched Cohort Study from the United States.

Background and aims: Bile acid sequestrants (BAS) are an emerging option for treatment of pouchitis. We aimed to compare BAS monotherapy, antibiotics, and combination therapy with both in the treatment of pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC).

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the US-Collaborative TriNetX database to identify patients with acute pouchitis and UC. Treatment groups were divided into BAS (cholestyramine, colesevelam, colestipol), antibiotics (ciprofloxacin and/or metronidazole), and combination therapy of both BAS and antibiotics. Primary outcomes were failure of initial therapy (early relapse or nonresponse) and the development of recurrent pouchitis in the first 12 months after an initial episode of pouchitis.

Results: Our analysis included 1,136 patients (mean age: 37.8 ± 15.4 years, and 45.9% female) of whom 727 (64%) were diagnosed with recurrent pouchitis. After adjusting for confounders by propensity-score matching, there was no significant difference in the odds of early relapse or nonresponse with BAS compared with antibiotic monotherapy (aOR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.40-1.38; p = 0.34) or combination therapy (aOR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.47-1.88; p = 0.86). Patients treated with BAS had a statistically significant lower recurrent pouchitis rate (aHR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.42-0.79; p < 0.001) compared with patients treated with antibiotics. Patients treated with BAS had a statistically significant longer time (median: 225 days) to recurrent pouchitis (p < 0.001) compared to antibiotics (median: 99 days).

Conclusion: Using real-world evidence regarding treatment of pouchitis compared to standard antibiotic therapy, BAS monotherapy was not inferior for initial treatment response and significantly prolonged time to recurrent pouchitis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
Digestive Diseases and Sciences 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
420
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Digestive Diseases and Sciences publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed, original papers addressing aspects of basic/translational and clinical research in gastroenterology, hepatology, and related fields. This well-illustrated journal features comprehensive coverage of basic pathophysiology, new technological advances, and clinical breakthroughs; insights from prominent academicians and practitioners concerning new scientific developments and practical medical issues; and discussions focusing on the latest changes in local and worldwide social, economic, and governmental policies that affect the delivery of care within the disciplines of gastroenterology and hepatology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信