The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Antibiotic prophylaxis in variceal hemorrhage: timing, effectiveness and Clostridium difficile rates

Antibiotic prophylaxis in variceal hemorrhage: timing, effectiveness and Clostridium difficile rates
Antibiotic prophylaxis in variceal hemorrhage: timing, effectiveness and Clostridium difficile rates

AIM: To investigate if antibiotics administered within 8 h of endoscopy reduce mortality or increase the incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).

METHODS: A 2-year retrospective analysis of all patients who presented with first variceal hemorrhage was undertaken. The primary outcome measure was 28-d mortality. Secondary outcome measures were 28-d rebleeding rates and 28-d incidence of CDI. All patients were admitted to a tertiary liver unit with a consultant-led, 24-h endoscopy service. Patients received standard care including terlipressin therapy. Data collection included: primary and secondary outcome measures, timing of first administration of intravenous antibiotics, etiology of liver disease, demographics, endoscopy details and complications. A prospective study was undertaken to determine the incidence of CDI in the study population and general medical inpatients admitted for antibiotic therapy of at least 5 d duration. Statistical analysis was undertaken using univariate, non-parametric tests and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS: There were 70 first presentations of variceal hemorrhage during the study period. Seventy percent of cases were male and 65.7% were due to chronic alcoholic liver disease. In total, 64/70 (91.4%) patients received antibiotics as prophylaxis during their admission. Specifically, 53/70 (75.7%) received antibiotics either before endoscopy or within 8 h of endoscopy [peri-endoscopy (8 h) group], whereas 17/70 (24.3%) received antibiotics at > 8 h after endoscopy or not at all (non peri-endoscopy group). Overall mortality and rebleeding rates were 13/70 (18.6%) and 14/70 (20%), respectively. The peri-endoscopy (8 h) group was significantly less likely to die compared with the non peri-endoscopy group [13.2% vs 35.3%, P = 0.04, odds ratio (OR) = 0.28 (0.078-0.997)] and showed a trend towards reduced rebleeding [17.0% vs 29.4%, P = 0.27, OR = 0.49 (0.14-1.74)]. On univariate analysis, the non peri-endoscopy group [P = 0.02, OR = 3.58 (1.00-12.81)], higher model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (P = 0.02), presence of hepatorenal syndrome [P < 0.01, OR = 11.25 (2.24-56.42)] and suffering a clinical episode of sepsis [P = 0.03, OR = 4.03 (1.11-14.58)] were significant predictors of death at 28 d. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, lower MELD score [P = 0.01, OR = 1.16 (1.04-1.28)] and peri-endoscopy (8 h) group [P = 0.01, OR = 0.15 (0.03-0.68)] were independent predictors of survival at 28 d. The CDI incidence (5.7%) was comparable to that in the general medical population (5%).

CONCLUSION: Antibiotics administered up to 8 h following endoscopy were associated with improved survival at 28 d. CDI incidence was comparable to that in other patient groups.

Adult, Aged, Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology, Antibiotic Prophylaxis, Clostridioides difficile/drug effects, Clostridium Infections/etiology, Endoscopy/adverse effects, Esophageal and Gastric Varices/microbiology, Female, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/microbiology, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Survival Rate
1007-9327
5317-23
Brown, Matthew R L
0a41eab2-316f-46b3-9345-72ff9fabcbb0
Jones, Graeme
f26c7d03-cd84-40c8-ae3a-286e861a5a29
Nash, Kathryn L
eda1639b-5700-44bb-9d15-93e14c646b2a
Wright, Mark
43325ef9-3459-4c75-b3bf-cf8d8dac2a21
Guha, Indra Neil
a3dddb81-7413-4309-b85d-afa33b8d3fce
Brown, Matthew R L
0a41eab2-316f-46b3-9345-72ff9fabcbb0
Jones, Graeme
f26c7d03-cd84-40c8-ae3a-286e861a5a29
Nash, Kathryn L
eda1639b-5700-44bb-9d15-93e14c646b2a
Wright, Mark
43325ef9-3459-4c75-b3bf-cf8d8dac2a21
Guha, Indra Neil
a3dddb81-7413-4309-b85d-afa33b8d3fce

Brown, Matthew R L, Jones, Graeme, Nash, Kathryn L, Wright, Mark and Guha, Indra Neil (2010) Antibiotic prophylaxis in variceal hemorrhage: timing, effectiveness and Clostridium difficile rates. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 16 (42), 5317-23. (doi:10.3748/wjg.v16.i42.5317).

Record type: Article

Abstract

AIM: To investigate if antibiotics administered within 8 h of endoscopy reduce mortality or increase the incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).

METHODS: A 2-year retrospective analysis of all patients who presented with first variceal hemorrhage was undertaken. The primary outcome measure was 28-d mortality. Secondary outcome measures were 28-d rebleeding rates and 28-d incidence of CDI. All patients were admitted to a tertiary liver unit with a consultant-led, 24-h endoscopy service. Patients received standard care including terlipressin therapy. Data collection included: primary and secondary outcome measures, timing of first administration of intravenous antibiotics, etiology of liver disease, demographics, endoscopy details and complications. A prospective study was undertaken to determine the incidence of CDI in the study population and general medical inpatients admitted for antibiotic therapy of at least 5 d duration. Statistical analysis was undertaken using univariate, non-parametric tests and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS: There were 70 first presentations of variceal hemorrhage during the study period. Seventy percent of cases were male and 65.7% were due to chronic alcoholic liver disease. In total, 64/70 (91.4%) patients received antibiotics as prophylaxis during their admission. Specifically, 53/70 (75.7%) received antibiotics either before endoscopy or within 8 h of endoscopy [peri-endoscopy (8 h) group], whereas 17/70 (24.3%) received antibiotics at > 8 h after endoscopy or not at all (non peri-endoscopy group). Overall mortality and rebleeding rates were 13/70 (18.6%) and 14/70 (20%), respectively. The peri-endoscopy (8 h) group was significantly less likely to die compared with the non peri-endoscopy group [13.2% vs 35.3%, P = 0.04, odds ratio (OR) = 0.28 (0.078-0.997)] and showed a trend towards reduced rebleeding [17.0% vs 29.4%, P = 0.27, OR = 0.49 (0.14-1.74)]. On univariate analysis, the non peri-endoscopy group [P = 0.02, OR = 3.58 (1.00-12.81)], higher model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (P = 0.02), presence of hepatorenal syndrome [P < 0.01, OR = 11.25 (2.24-56.42)] and suffering a clinical episode of sepsis [P = 0.03, OR = 4.03 (1.11-14.58)] were significant predictors of death at 28 d. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, lower MELD score [P = 0.01, OR = 1.16 (1.04-1.28)] and peri-endoscopy (8 h) group [P = 0.01, OR = 0.15 (0.03-0.68)] were independent predictors of survival at 28 d. The CDI incidence (5.7%) was comparable to that in the general medical population (5%).

CONCLUSION: Antibiotics administered up to 8 h following endoscopy were associated with improved survival at 28 d. CDI incidence was comparable to that in other patient groups.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 14 November 2010
Keywords: Adult, Aged, Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology, Antibiotic Prophylaxis, Clostridioides difficile/drug effects, Clostridium Infections/etiology, Endoscopy/adverse effects, Esophageal and Gastric Varices/microbiology, Female, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/microbiology, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Survival Rate

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 478076
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/478076
ISSN: 1007-9327
PURE UUID: bca04d63-80f3-4108-ad5d-ac63b11e9a83

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 21 Jun 2023 16:53
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 02:13

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Matthew R L Brown
Author: Graeme Jones
Author: Kathryn L Nash
Author: Mark Wright
Author: Indra Neil Guha

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×