Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Alvarez,Roberto Fiolic
Data de Publicação: 2005
Outros Autores: Mattos,Angelo Alves de, Corrêa,Esther Buzaglo Dantas, Cotrim,Helma Pinchemel, Nascimento,Tereza Virginia S. B.
Tipo de documento: Relatório
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032005000400012
Resumo: BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with chronic liver disease and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is poor, being of great importance its prevention. AIM: To compare the effectiveness of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin for prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty seven patients with cirrhosis and ascites were evaluated between March 1999 and March 2001. All of them had a previous episode of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or had ascitic fluid protein concentration <1 g/dL and/or serum bilirubin > 2.5 mg/dL. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either 800/160 mg/day of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 5 days a week or 400 mg of norfloxacin daily. The mean time of observation was 163 days for the norfloxacin group and 182 days for the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group. In the statistical analysis, differences were considered significant at the level of 0.05. RESULTS: According to the inclusion criteria, 32 patients (56%) were treated with norfloxacin and 25 (44%) with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis occurred in three patients receiving norfloxacin (9.4%) and in four patients receiving trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (16.0%). Extraperitoneal infections occurred in 10 patients receiving norfloxacin (31.3%) and in 6 patients receiving trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (24.0%). Death occurred in seven patients (21.9%) who received norfloxacin and in five (20.0%) who received trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Side effects occurred only in the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group. CONCLUSION: In spite of the reduced number of patients and time of observation, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and norfloxacin were equally effective in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prophylaxis, suggesting that trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole is a valid alternative to norfloxacin.
id IBEPEGE-1_4c3f035580932432a4812b84573771c3
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0004-28032005000400012
network_acronym_str IBEPEGE-1
network_name_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosisPeritonitisLiver cirrhosisAscitesTrimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole combinationNorfloxacinBACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with chronic liver disease and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is poor, being of great importance its prevention. AIM: To compare the effectiveness of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin for prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty seven patients with cirrhosis and ascites were evaluated between March 1999 and March 2001. All of them had a previous episode of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or had ascitic fluid protein concentration <1 g/dL and/or serum bilirubin > 2.5 mg/dL. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either 800/160 mg/day of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 5 days a week or 400 mg of norfloxacin daily. The mean time of observation was 163 days for the norfloxacin group and 182 days for the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group. In the statistical analysis, differences were considered significant at the level of 0.05. RESULTS: According to the inclusion criteria, 32 patients (56%) were treated with norfloxacin and 25 (44%) with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis occurred in three patients receiving norfloxacin (9.4%) and in four patients receiving trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (16.0%). Extraperitoneal infections occurred in 10 patients receiving norfloxacin (31.3%) and in 6 patients receiving trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (24.0%). Death occurred in seven patients (21.9%) who received norfloxacin and in five (20.0%) who received trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Side effects occurred only in the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group. CONCLUSION: In spite of the reduced number of patients and time of observation, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and norfloxacin were equally effective in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prophylaxis, suggesting that trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole is a valid alternative to norfloxacin.Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE. 2005-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/reportinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032005000400012Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.42 n.4 2005reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiainstacron:IBEPEGE10.1590/S0004-28032005000400012info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAlvarez,Roberto FiolicMattos,Angelo Alves deCorrêa,Esther Buzaglo DantasCotrim,Helma PinchemelNascimento,Tereza Virginia S. B.eng2006-01-19T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-28032005000400012Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/aghttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br1678-42190004-2803opendoar:2006-01-19T00:00Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
title Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
spellingShingle Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
Alvarez,Roberto Fiolic
Peritonitis
Liver cirrhosis
Ascites
Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole combination
Norfloxacin
title_short Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
title_full Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
title_fullStr Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
title_full_unstemmed Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
title_sort Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
author Alvarez,Roberto Fiolic
author_facet Alvarez,Roberto Fiolic
Mattos,Angelo Alves de
Corrêa,Esther Buzaglo Dantas
Cotrim,Helma Pinchemel
Nascimento,Tereza Virginia S. B.
author_role author
author2 Mattos,Angelo Alves de
Corrêa,Esther Buzaglo Dantas
Cotrim,Helma Pinchemel
Nascimento,Tereza Virginia S. B.
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Alvarez,Roberto Fiolic
Mattos,Angelo Alves de
Corrêa,Esther Buzaglo Dantas
Cotrim,Helma Pinchemel
Nascimento,Tereza Virginia S. B.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Peritonitis
Liver cirrhosis
Ascites
Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole combination
Norfloxacin
topic Peritonitis
Liver cirrhosis
Ascites
Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole combination
Norfloxacin
description BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with chronic liver disease and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is poor, being of great importance its prevention. AIM: To compare the effectiveness of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin for prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty seven patients with cirrhosis and ascites were evaluated between March 1999 and March 2001. All of them had a previous episode of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or had ascitic fluid protein concentration <1 g/dL and/or serum bilirubin > 2.5 mg/dL. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either 800/160 mg/day of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 5 days a week or 400 mg of norfloxacin daily. The mean time of observation was 163 days for the norfloxacin group and 182 days for the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group. In the statistical analysis, differences were considered significant at the level of 0.05. RESULTS: According to the inclusion criteria, 32 patients (56%) were treated with norfloxacin and 25 (44%) with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis occurred in three patients receiving norfloxacin (9.4%) and in four patients receiving trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (16.0%). Extraperitoneal infections occurred in 10 patients receiving norfloxacin (31.3%) and in 6 patients receiving trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (24.0%). Death occurred in seven patients (21.9%) who received norfloxacin and in five (20.0%) who received trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. Side effects occurred only in the trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole group. CONCLUSION: In spite of the reduced number of patients and time of observation, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and norfloxacin were equally effective in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prophylaxis, suggesting that trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole is a valid alternative to norfloxacin.
publishDate 2005
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2005-12-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/report
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format report
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032005000400012
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032005000400012
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S0004-28032005000400012
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.42 n.4 2005
reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron:IBEPEGE
instname_str Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron_str IBEPEGE
institution IBEPEGE
reponame_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
collection Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br
_version_ 1754193343653347328