Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2025
A National Survey Shows a Dilemma Toward Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis Prophylaxis Among US-Based Hepatology Professionals.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
DiazGranados Deborah, O'Leary Jacqueline G, Yamuzala Madhumita, Rogal Shari, Bajaj Jasmohan S
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prophylaxis (SBPPr)-related practices are evolving, with recent studies showing almost half of potential subjects not being initiated on it. Determine practice dilemmas regarding SBPPr among US-based hepatology providers.
METHODS: A questionnaire regarding primary and secondary SBPPr using quantitative and qualitative (open-ended) approaches was sent to US-based hepatology providers electronically.
RESULTS: A total of 113 clinicians (86% physicians, 73% academic centers) responded. 54% started Primary and 72% secondary SBPPr in 50% of eligible patients. However, the issues related to antimicrobial resistance and ineffectiveness lead to SBPPr usage variations and restrictions on a patient-specific basis. Most respondents (>70%) would withdraw/not initiate SBPPr with data regarding ineffectiveness and harms. Open-ended answers showed that most believed newer trials to reduce reliance on weaker older evidence are needed.
DISCUSSION: A survey of US-based hepatologists demonstrates a major dilemma between usual care of initiating SBPPr versus not initiating/withdrawing SBPPr that needs newer randomized trials.
METHODS: A questionnaire regarding primary and secondary SBPPr using quantitative and qualitative (open-ended) approaches was sent to US-based hepatology providers electronically.
RESULTS: A total of 113 clinicians (86% physicians, 73% academic centers) responded. 54% started Primary and 72% secondary SBPPr in 50% of eligible patients. However, the issues related to antimicrobial resistance and ineffectiveness lead to SBPPr usage variations and restrictions on a patient-specific basis. Most respondents (>70%) would withdraw/not initiate SBPPr with data regarding ineffectiveness and harms. Open-ended answers showed that most believed newer trials to reduce reliance on weaker older evidence are needed.
DISCUSSION: A survey of US-based hepatologists demonstrates a major dilemma between usual care of initiating SBPPr versus not initiating/withdrawing SBPPr that needs newer randomized trials.