Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2005 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
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 |