A randomized controlled study of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole versus norfloxacin for the prevention of infection in cirrhotic patients

Hepatotoxicity of Antibiotics and Antifungals and Their Safe Use in Hepatic Impairment

Idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a rare and unpredictable form of hepatotoxicity. While its clinical course is usually benign, cases leading to liver transplantation or death can occur. Based on modern prospective registries, antimicrobials including antibiotics and antifungals are frequently implicated as common causes. Amoxicillin-clavulanate ranks as the most common cause for DILI in the Western World. Although the absolute risk of hepatotoxicity of these agents is low, as their usage is quite high, it is not uncommon for practitioners to encounter liver injury following the initiation of antibiotic or antifungal therapy. In this review article, mechanisms of hepatoxicity are presented. The adverse hepatic effects of well-established antibiotic and antifungal agents are described, including their frequency, severity, and pattern of injury and their HLA risks. We also review the drug labeling and prescription guidance from regulatory bodies, with a focus on individuals with hepatic impairment.

Norfloxacin versus alternative antibiotics for prophylaxis of spontaneous bacteria peritonitis in cirrhosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a life-threatening complication in patients with advanced cirrhosis. Prophylactic Norfloxacin used to be considered effective in SBP prevention, but in recent years its efficacy has been partially compromised by increasing quinolone-resistant bacteria. However, whether the effects of alternative prophylactic regimens are superior to norfloxacin remains controversial. The goal of this study is to compare the effects of norfloxacin with other antibiotics in SBP prophylaxis for cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library Databases. Two reviewers independently identified relevant random control trials (RCTs) comparing the role of norfloxacin and other antibiotics in SBP prevention.

RESULTS

Eight studies comprising 1043 cirrhotic patients were included in this study. Norfloxacin and alternative antibiotics displayed comparable effects in SBP prophylaxis, survival benefit, overall infection prevention, and safety. Subgroup analyses revealed that rifaximin prophylaxis could reduce the recurrence of SBP with fewer adverse events but failed to improve overall survival compared with norfloxacin.

CONCLUSIONS

Other antibiotics are a reasonable alternative to norfloxacin in the prophylaxis of SBP. Rifaximin prophylaxis could be an alternative choose of antibiotic for SBP prevention because of its better protective effect and safety.

Mastering Core Recommendations during HEPAtology ROUNDS in Patients with Advanced Chronic Liver Disease

Efficient and thorough care of hospitalized patients with advanced chronic liver disease is of utter importance to improve outcomes and optimize quality of life. This requires understanding current evidence and best practices. To facilitate focus on up-to-date knowledge and a practical approach, we have created the HEPA-ROUNDS mnemonic while outlining a practical review of the literature with critical appraisal for the busy clinician. The HEPA-ROUNDS mnemonic provides a structured approach that incorporates critical concepts in terms of prevention, management, and prognostication of the most common complications frequently encountered in patients with advanced chronic liver disease. In addition, implementing the HEPA-ROUNDS mnemonic can facilitate education for trainees and staff caring for patients with advanced chronic liver disease.

Early Diagnosis and Prevention of Infections in Cirrhosis

Strategies to prevent infection and improve outcomes in patients with cirrhosis. HAV, hepatitis A virus; HBV, hepatitis B virus; COVID-19, novel coronavirus disease 2019; NSBB, nonselective β-blocker; PPI, proton pump inhibitors.Cirrhosis is a risk factor for infections. Majority of hospital admissions in patients with cirrhosis are due to infections. Sepsis is an immunological response to an infectious process that leads to end-organ dysfunction and death. Preventing infections may avoid the downstream complications, and early diagnosis of infections may improve the outcomes. In this review, we discuss the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and biomarkers of infection; the incremental preventive strategies for infections and sepsi; and the consequent organ failures in cirrhosis. Strategies for primary prevention include reducing gut translocation by selective intestinal decontamination, avoiding unnecessary proton pump inhibitors' use, appropriate use of β-blockers, and vaccinations for viral diseases including novel coronavirus disease 2019. Secondary prevention includes early diagnosis and a timely and judicious use of antibiotics to prevent organ dysfunction. Organ failure support constitutes tertiary intervention in cirrhosis. In conclusion, infections in cirrhosis are potentially preventable with appropriate care strategies to then enable improved outcomes.

Primary Norfloxacin Prophylaxis for APASL-Defined Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: A Placebo-Controlled Double-Blind Randomized Trial

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the role of prophylactic norfloxacin in preventing bacterial infections and its effect on transplant-free survival (TFS) in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) identified by the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver criteria.

METHODS

Patients with ACLF included in the study were randomly assigned to receive oral norfloxacin 400 mg or matched placebo once daily for 30 days. The incidence of bacterial infections at days 30 and 90 was the primary outcome, whereas TFS at days 30 and 90 was the secondary outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 143 patients were included (72 in the norfloxacin and 71 in the placebo groups). Baseline demographics, biochemical variables, and severity scores were similar between the 2 groups. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, the incidence of bacterial infections at day 30 was 18.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10-28.9) and 33.8% (95% CI, 23-46) (P = 0.03); and the incidence of bacterial infections at day 90 was 46% (95% CI, 34-58) and 62% (95% CI, 49.67-73.23) in the norfloxacin and placebo groups, respectively (P = 0.02). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, TFS at day 30 was 77.8% (95% CI, 66.43-86.73) and 64.8% (95% CI, 52.54-75.75) in the norfloxacin and placebo groups, respectively (P = 0.084). Similarly, TFS at day 90 was 58.3% (95% CI, 46.11-69.84) and 43.7% (95% CI, 31.91-55.95), respectively (P = 0.058). Thirty percent of infections were caused by multidrug-resistant organisms. More patients developed concomitant candiduria in the norfloxacin group (25%) than in the placebo group (2.63%).

DISCUSSION

Primary norfloxacin prophylaxis effectively prevents bacterial infections in patients with ACLF.

Antibiotics and Liver Cirrhosis: What the Physicians Need to Know

The liver is the primary site of drug metabolism, which can be altered by a variety of diseases affecting the liver parenchyma, especially in patients with liver cirrhosis. The use of antibiotics in patients with cirrhosis is usually a matter of concern for physicians, given the lack of practical knowledge for drug choice and eventual dose adjustments in several clinical scenarios. The aim of the current narrative review is to report, as broadly as possible, basic, and practical knowledge that any physician should have when approaching a patient with liver cirrhosis and an ongoing infection to efficiently choose the best antibiotic therapy.

The Risk of Clostridioides difficile Infection in Cirrhotic Patients Receiving Norfloxacin for Secondary Prophylaxis of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis-A Real Life Cohort

Background and Objectives: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a life-threatening complication of liver cirrhosis. Antibiotic prophylaxis is effective but can lead to an increased incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of CDI and the risk factors in cirrhotic patients with a previous episode of SBP receiving norfloxacin as secondary prophylaxis. Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective, cohort study including patients with liver cirrhosis and SBP, successfully treated over a 2-year period in a tertiary university hospital. All the patients received secondary prophylaxis for SBP with norfloxacin 400 mg/day. Results: There were 122 patients with liver cirrhosis and SBP included (mean age 57.5 ± 10.8 years, 65.5% males). Alcoholic cirrhosis was the major etiology accounting for 63.1% of cases. The mean MELD score was 19.7 ± 6.1. Twenty-three (18.8%) of all patients developed CDI during follow-up, corresponding to an incidence of 24.8 cases per 10,000 person-years. The multivariate Cox regression analysis demonstrated that alcoholic LC etiology (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.104-2.441, p = 0.029) and Child-Pugh C class (HR 2.50, 95% CI 1.257-3.850, p = 0.034) were independent risk factors for CDI development during norfloxacin secondary prophylaxis. The development of CDI did not influence the mortality rates in cirrhotic patients with SBP receiving norfloxacin. Conclusions: Cirrhotic patients with SBP and Child-Pugh C class and alcoholic liver cirrhosis had a higher risk of developing Clostridioides difficile infection during norfloxacin secondary prophylaxis. In patients with alcoholic Child-Pugh C class liver cirrhosis, alternative prophylaxis should be evaluated as SBP secondary prophylaxis.

Portal Hypertension and Ascites: Patient-and Population-centered Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF)

Portal hypertension and ascites are two crucial events in the natural history of liver cirrhosis, whose appearance marks a downward shift in the prognosis of the disease. Over the years, several international and national societies have issued clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of portal hypertension and ascites. The present document addresses the needs of an updated guidance on the clinical management of these conditions. Accordingly, the AISF Governing Board appointed a multi-disciplinary committee of experts for drafting an update of the most recent EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines. The aim of this work was to adapt the EASL recommendations to national regulations and resources, local circumstances and settings, infrastructure, and cost/benefit strategies to avoid duplication of efforts and optimize resource utilization. The committee defined the objectives, the key issues and retrieved the relevant evidence by performing a systematic review of the literature. Finally, the committee members (chosen on the basis of their specific expertise) identified the guidelines' key questions and developed them following the PICO format (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes). For each of the PICO questions, the systematic review of the literature was made on the most important scientific databases (Pubmed, Scopus, Embase).

Antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis: Current evidence for clinical practice

Patients with cirrhosis show an increased susceptibility to infection due to disease-related immune-dysfunction. Bacterial infection therefore represents a common, often detrimental event in patients with advanced liver disease, since it can worsen portal hypertension and impair the function of hepatic and extra-hepatic organs. Among pharmacological strategies to prevent infection, antibiotic prophylaxis remains the first-choice, especially in high-risk groups, such as patients with acute variceal bleeding, low ascitic fluid proteins, and prior episodes of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Nevertheless, antibiotic prophylaxis has to deal with the changing bacterial epidemiology in cirrhosis, with increased rates of gram-positive bacteria and multidrug resistant rods, warnings about quinolones-related side effects, and low prescription adherence. Short-term antibiotic prophylaxis is applied in many other settings during hospitalization, such as before interventional or surgical procedures, but often without knowledge of local bacterial epidemiology and without strict adherence to antimicrobial stewardship. This paper offers a detailed overview on the application of antibiotic prophylaxis in cirrhosis, according to the current evidence.

Changes in the epidemiology and management of bacterial infections in cirrhosis

Patients with cirrhosis are susceptible to develop infections because of immune dysfunction, changes in microbiome and increase in bacterial translocation from the gut to systemic circulation. Bacterial infections can worse the clinical course of the disease, triggering the development of complications such as acute kidney injury, hepatic encephalopathy, organ failures and acute on chronic liver failure. In recent years, the spread of multi drug resistant bacteria made more challenging the management of infections in patients with cirrhosis. Hence, the mortality rate associated to sepsis is increasing in these patients. Therefore, the optimization of the management of infections has a high priority in cirrhosis. Herein we reviewed the recent changes in the epidemiology and the management of bacterial infections in patients with liver cirrhosis.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in liver cirrhosis: systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is a potentially life-threatening infection in patients with liver cirrhosis and ascites. Its prevention is vital to improve prognosis of cirrhotic patients. The main objective of this systematic review was to evaluate what is the most efficacious and safest antibiotic prophylactic strategy.

METHODS

Studies were located by searching PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library until February 2019. Randomized controlled trials evaluating primary or secondary spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prophylaxis in cirrhotic patients with ascites were included. The selection of studies was performed in two stages: screening of titles and abstracts, and assessment of the full papers identified as relevant, considering the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted in a standardized way and synthesized qualitatively.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included. This systematic review demonstrated that daily norfloxacin is effective as a prophylactic antibiotic for the prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in patients with cirrhosis. Once weekly ciprofloxacin was not inferior to once daily norfloxacin, with good tolerance and no induced resistance. Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and norfloxacin have similar efficacy for primary and secondary prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, however, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was associated with an increased risk of developing an adverse event. Rifaximin was more effective than norfloxacin in the secondary prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, with a significant decrease in adverse events and mortality rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous long-term selective intestinal decontamination with norfloxacin is the most widely used prophylactic strategy in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, yet other equally effective and safe options are available.

Systemic review and network meta-analysis: Prophylactic antibiotic therapy for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is an important prognostic factor for outcomes in patients with cirrhosis. Antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended in patients at high risk for developing SBP, but the choice of antibiotics remains unclear.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of various antibiotics for prophylaxis of SBP based on randomized control trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched through November 2018 for RCTs evaluating the efficacy of therapies for primary or secondary prophylaxis of SBP. The primary outcome was the development of SBP. Sensitivity analyses limited to studies of primary or secondary prophylaxis and studies reported after 2010 were performed. The secondary outcome was the risk of all-cause mortality or transplant. The outcomes were assessed by rank of therapies based on network meta-analyses. Individual meta-analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs (1742 patients) including norfloxacin, ciprofloxacin, rifaximin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), or placebo/no comparator were identified. Individual meta-analyses showed superiority of rifaximin over norfloxacin as well as norfloxacin and TMP-SMX over placebo. Network meta-analysis demonstrated the rank of efficacy in reducing the risk of SBP as: Rifaximin, ciprofloxacin, TMP-SMX, norfloxacin, and placebo/no comparator. Rifaximin ranked highest in sensitivity analyses limited to studies of primary or secondary prophylaxis and studies reported after 2010. Similarly, rifaximin ranked highest in reducing the risk of death/transplant.

CONCLUSION

The present comprehensive network meta-analysis provides RCT based evidence for superior efficacy of rifaximin compared to other antibiotics for the prophylaxis of SBP and reducing risk of death/transplant. Further RCTs are warranted to confirm our findings.

Antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in people with liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 2.5% of all hospitalisations in people with liver cirrhosis are for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is associated with significant short-term mortality; therefore, it is important to prevent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in people at high risk of developing it. Antibiotic prophylaxis forms the mainstay preventive method, but this has to be balanced against the development of drug-resistant spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, which is difficult to treat, and other adverse events. Several different prophylactic antibiotic treatments are available; however, there is uncertainty surrounding their relative efficacy and optimal combination.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different prophylactic antibiotic treatments for prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in people with liver cirrhosis using a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different prophylactic antibiotic treatments according to their safety and efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers to November 2018 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis at risk of developing spontaneous bacterial peritonitis.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis undergoing prophylactic treatment to prevent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation, or were receiving antibiotics for treatment of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or other purposes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio, rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 randomised clinical trials (3896 participants; nine antibiotic regimens (ciprofloxacin, neomycin, norfloxacin, norfloxacin plus neomycin, norfloxacin plus rifaximin, rifaximin, rufloxacin, sparfloxacin, sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim), and 'no active intervention' in the review. Twenty-three trials (2587 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies, with or without other features of decompensation, having ascites with low protein or previous history of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 1 to 12 months. Many of the trials were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was low or very low. Overall, approximately 10% of trial participants developed spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and 15% of trial participants died. There was no evidence of differences between any of the antibiotics and no intervention in terms of mortality (very low certainty) or number of serious adverse events (very low certainty). However, because of the wide CrIs, clinically important differences in these outcomes cannot be ruled out. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life or the proportion of people with serious adverse events. There was no evidence of differences between any of the antibiotics and no intervention in terms of proportion of people with 'any adverse events' (very low certainty), liver transplantation (very low certainty), or the proportion of people who developed spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (very low certainty). The number of 'any' adverse events per participant was fewer with norfloxacin (rate ratio 0.74, 95% CrI 0.59 to 0.94; 4 trials, 546 participants; low certainty) and sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim (rate ratio 0.19, 95% CrI 0.02 to 0.81; 1 trial, 60 participants; low certainty) versus no active intervention. There was no evidence of differences between the other antibiotics and no intervention in the number of 'any' adverse events per participant (very low certainty). There were fewer other decompensation events with rifaximin versus no active intervention (rate ratio 0.61, 65% CrI 0.46 to 0.80; 3 trials, 575 participants; low certainty) and norfloxacin plus neomycin (rate ratio 0.06, 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.33; 1 trial, 22 participants; low certainty). There was no evidence of differences between the other antibiotics and no intervention in the number of decompensations events per participant (very low certainty). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life or development of symptomatic spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. One would expect some correlation between the above outcomes, with interventions demonstrating effectiveness across several outcomes. This was not the case. The possible reasons for this include sparse data and selective reporting bias, which makes the results unreliable. Therefore, one cannot draw any conclusions from these inconsistent differences based on sparse data. There was no evidence of any differences in the subgroup analyses (performed when possible) based on whether the prophylaxis was primary or secondary.

FUNDING

the source of funding for five trials were organisations who would benefit from the results of the study; six trials received no additional funding or were funded by neutral organisations; and the source of funding for the remaining 18 trials was unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is considerable uncertainty about whether antibiotic prophylaxis is beneficial, and if beneficial, which antibiotic prophylaxis is most beneficial in people with cirrhosis and ascites with low protein or history of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered, employ blinding, avoid postrandomisation dropouts (or perform intention-to-treat analysis), and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, health-related quality of life, and decompensation events.

Primary and secondary prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: current state of the art

Introduction: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis represents a frequent and severe complication in cirrhotic patients with ascites. In daily practice, the diagnosis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis might be challenging in the absence of the typical signs and symptoms of infection such as fever or leukocytosis. Areas covered: Aim of this review is to revise the current state of the art on primary and secondary spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Literature search in Medline/Pubmed was performed. Expert opinion: Historically, gram-negative bacteria were the most frequent etiologic agents of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, with Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. being the most frequently isolated bacteria. However, major changes in this regard occurred over the last few decades with an increasing prevalence of gram-positive, quinolone-resistant, and multidrug-resistant bacteria. In particular, the increasing prevalence of quinolone-resistant bacteria challenged the prominent role of norfloxacin in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prevention. Given the high mortality rate and the risk of developing the hepatorenal syndrome, prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is indicated in three high-risk populations: patients with acute gastrointestinal hemorrhage, patients with low total protein content in ascitic fluid and advanced cirrhosis, and patients with a previous history of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (secondary prophylaxis).

Comparative efficacy of long-term antibiotic treatments in the primary prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several antibiotic treatments aiming to prevent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) in cirrhotic patients with low-protein content in ascitic fluid have been tested; however, there are limited data on the comparative efficacy of these regimens. We assessed their comparative efficacy through a network meta-analysis and using GRADE criteria to appraise quality of evidence.

METHODS

Through literature review through October 2018, we identified 10 randomized controlled trials comparing antibiotic treatments (norfloxacin, ciprofloxacin, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole and rifaximin) with each other or placebo. Primary outcome was SBP occurrence, with mortality rate and rate of other infections as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

In comparison with placebo, moderate quality evidence supports the use of norfloxacin and ciprofloxacin in primary prophylaxis of SBP (risk ratio 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.56; P = 0.001 and 0.23; 0.07-0.79; P = 0.02 respectively) while only low quality evidence suggests superiority of rifaximin (risk ratio 0.15; 0.05-0.42). When antimicrobial agents were compared to each other, no significant difference was found. With regard to mortality, moderate quality supports the superiority of norfloxacin over placebo (risk ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-0.99; P = 0.04), while ciprofloxacin and rifaximin showed only a non-significant benefit and no significant difference was found in the other comparisons. None of the tested antibiotics proved to significantly decrease the rate of other infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Norfloxacin appears to have significant benefit both in terms of SBP prevention and mortality; ciprofloxacin represents a valuable option although without a clear survival benefit. Rifaximin shows interesting results but needs to be tested in further trials.

Norfloxacin, ciprofloxacin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and rifaximin for the prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: a network meta-analysis

For the prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) in cirrhotic patients with ascites, prophylactic antibiotics are recommended as a standard regimen. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of norfloxacin (N), ciprofloxacin (C), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (T-S), and rifaximin (R) in the prevention of SBP. We searched the electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science from inception till 1 August 2018. The randomized-controlled trials that compared N, C, T-S, R, and placebo (P) were identified. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was carried out using the software STATA 14.0 and Revman 5.3. We included 16 studies involving 1984 participants in the NMA for SBP prevention. The NMA results showed that, compared with those treated with P (reference), patients treated with C, N, or R had a lower incidence of SBP and mortality. Similarly, the incidences of SBP and mortality for R were lower than those for N. The probabilities of ranking results showed that R ranked first with respect to the outcomes of the incidence of SBP and mortality. According to our results, R seemed to be the optimal regimen for protecting against SBP in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. However, considering the limitations of our study, additional high-quality studies are required in this respect.

Clinical value of inflammatory factors in early diagnosis of primary biliary cirrhosis with bacterial infection

AIM

To investigate the changes of procalcitonin, neutrophil percentage, and immunoglobulin expression in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and bacterial infection, and to determine their clinical value in the early diagnosis of primary biliary cirrhosis with bacterial infection.

METHODS

The medical records of 83 patients with primary biliary cirrhosis admitted to Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University from March 2014 to May 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. According to he presence or absence of bacterial infection, the patients were divided into an infected group (n = 47) and a non-infected group (n = 36). Serum procalcitonin (PCT) levels, neutrophil percentage (N%), white blood cell count (WBC), and immunoglobulins such as IgM and IgG were tested and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis showed that the mean serum PCT level of the infected group was significantly higher than that of the uninfected group (2.99 ng/mL ± 1.48 ng/mL vs 0.11 ng/mL ± 0.05 ng/mL, P < 0.05), and half of the patients in the infected group had a serum PCT level ≥ 2 ng/mL. Inflammatory markers such as N%, WBC, IgM, and IgG in the infected group were significantly higher than the normal range and those of the control group(84.52% ± 11.87% vs 56.04% ± 8.15%, 8.44 × 10⁹/L ± 3.05 × 10⁹/L vs 3.10 × 10⁹/L ± 1.29 × 10⁹/L, 7.33 g/L ± 2.82 g/L vs 3.18 g/L ± 1.03 g/L, 32.18 g/L ± 8.61 g/L vs 18.09 g/L ± 6.14 g/L, P < 0.05 for all). The levels of PCT, N%, WBC, IgM, and IgG in patients with different types of infection had no significant difference (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Serum PCT, N%, and immunoglobulin levels in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and bacterial infection are significantly higher than the normal reference value, and serum PCT level is of great value in assessing the inflammatory level of patients. Combined detection of serum PCT, N%, and immunoglobulin levels is of great significance for the early diagnosis of primary biliary cirrhosis with bacterial infection.

Role of Rifaximin in Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis Prevention

Cirrhosis affects millions of people around the world and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a common complication of liver disease with cirrhosis and accounts for up to 30% of infections in patients with cirrhosis. Patients with a history of SBP and those deemed to be at high risk often are prescribed antibiotics to reduce the incidence of SBP. Fluoroquinolones and sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim are commonly used antibiotics for long-term prevention for these specified populations; however, these antibiotics are associated with several adverse effects and interactions that may be harmful to patients. In addition, resistance development may decrease the efficacy of SBP treatment and prophylaxis. Given these limitations, rifaximin, a nonabsorbable, broad-spectrum antibiotic that is used for hepatic encephalopathy, may serve as a prophylactic alternative to conventional therapy. This review discusses guideline-recommended therapy and the evidence for using rifaximin for SBP prophylaxis.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in cirrhosis: Good and bad

Patients with cirrhosis, particularly those with decompensated cirrhosis, are at increased risk of bacterial infections that may further precipitate other liver decompensations including acute-on-chronic liver failure. Infections constitute the main cause of death in patients with advanced cirrhosis, and strategies to prevent them are essential. The main current strategy is the use of prophylactic antibiotics targeted at specific subpopulations at high risk of infection: prior episode of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and low-protein ascites with associated poor liver function. Antibiotic prophylaxis effectively prevents not only the development of bacterial infections in all these indications but also further decompensation (variceal bleeding, hepatorenal syndrome) and improves survival. However, antibiotic prophylaxis is also associated with a clinically relevant and increasing drawback, the development of infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms. Several strategies have been suggested to balance the risks and benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic stewardship principles such as the restriction of antibiotic prophylaxis to subpopulations at a very high risk for infection, the avoidance of antibiotic overuse, and early deescalation policies are key to achieve this balance; nonantibiotic prophylactic measures such as probiotics, prokinetics, bile acids, statins, and hematopoietic growth factors could also contribute to ameliorate the development and spread of multidrug-resistant bacteria in cirrhosis. (Hepatology 2016;63:2019-2031).

Treatment of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is an infection of patients with cirrhosis and ascites. This peculiarity is due to the frequent intestinal translocation that allows bacteria to cross the intestinal barrier, colonizing the ascitic fluid. In cirrhosis, SBP is inferior only to urinary tract infections. It is prevalently sustained by Gram-negative bacteria such as Escherichia coli and Klebsiella. Risk factors for developing SBP are advanced age, refractory ascites, variceal bleeding, renal failure, low albumin levels (below 2.5 g/ml), bilirubin over 4 mg/dl, Child-Pugh class C and a previous diagnosis of SBP. Thus, this is an indication for a long-term antibiotic prophylaxis with norfloxacin. Renal failure - especially the hepatorenal syndrome - complicates SBP in about 20% of cases independently of the efficacy of the antibiotic therapy. The mortality of these patients is about 90%. Infusion of albumin significantly reduces the incidence of hepatorenal syndrome and consequently the risk of death. Long-term quinolonic prophylaxis as well as increased antibiotic therapies are causing the emergence of multidrug-resistant agents as frequent causes of SBP. In such cases, the antibiotic sensitivity to quinolones is low, and European recommendations suggest a second-line antibiotic therapy, including meropenem or piperacillin plus tazobactam. Collection of blood, urine and ascitic fluid for cultures is important for bacterial recognition, possibly before starting an empirical antibiotic therapy. Indeed, the probability of positive cultures rapidly vanishes when they are performed during already implemented antibiotic administration. It is important to know that a failure of the first-line therapy is associated with an increased probability of death.