4.6 Article

Cyclosporine or infliximab as rescue therapy in severe refractory ulcerative colitis: Early and long-term data from a retrospective observational study

期刊

JOURNAL OF CROHNS & COLITIS
卷 6, 期 6, 页码 681-686

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.crohns.2011.11.021

关键词

Ulcerative colitis; Steroid-refractory; Cyclosporine; Infliximab; Colectomy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: About 30-40% of patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis (UC) fail to respond to intensive intravenous (iv) corticosteroid treatment. lv cyclosporine and infliximab are an effective rescue therapy in steroid-refractory UC patients but up to now it is still unclear which is the best therapeutic choice. Methods: We reviewed our series of severe steroid-refractory colitis admitted consecutively since 1994 comparing two historical cohort treated with iv cyclosporine (2 mg/kg) or iv infliximab (5 mg/kg). The main outcome was the colectomy rate at 3 months, 12 months and at the end of the follow-up. Results: A total of 65 patients were included: 35 in the cyclosporine group and 30 in the infliximab one. At 3 months the colectomy rate was 28.5% in the cyclosporine group and 17% in the infliximab group (p = 0.25), while 48% versus 17% at 12 months (p = 0.007, OR 4.7; 95% CI: 1.47-15.16). The 1-2-3 year cumulative colectomy rates were 48%, 54%, 57% in the cyclosporine group, and 17%, 23%, 27% in the infliximab group. At the end of the follow-up the colectomy rate was 60% versus 30% (p = 0.04, HR 2.2; 95% CI: 1.11-4.86). High level of C reactive protein (p = 0.04), extensive disease (p = 0.01) and no azathioprine treatment (p<0.001) were related to the risk of colectomy. Conclusion: This study, despite being retrospective, indicates that both cyclosporine and infliximab are effective in avoiding a colectomy in steroid-refractory UC patients. During the follow-up the risk of a colectomy is higher in patients treated with cyclosporine than with infliximab. (C) 2012 European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据