The empirical antibiotic treatment of nosocomial spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: Results of a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

UNLABELLED: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a common, life-threatening complication of liver cirrhosis. Third-generation cephalosporins have been considered the first-line treatment of SBP. In 2014, a panel of experts suggested a broader spectrum antibiotic regimen for nosocomial SBP, according to the high rate of bacteria resistant to third-generation cephalosporins found in these patients. However, a broader-spectrum antibiotic regimen has never been compared to third-generation cephalosporins in the treatment of nosocomial SBP. The aim of our study was to compare meropenem plus daptomycin versus ceftazidime in the treatment of nosocomial SBP. Patients with cirrhosis and nosocomial SBP were randomized to receive meropenem (1 g/8 hours) plus daptomycin (6 mg/kg/day) or ceftazidime (2 g/8 hours). A paracentesis was performed after 48 hours of treatment. A reduction in ascitic fluid neutrophil count <25% of pretreatment value was considered a treatment failure. The primary outcome was the efficacy of treatment defined by the resolution of SBP after 7 days of treatment. Thirty-two patients were randomized and 31 were analyzed. The combination of meropenem plus daptomycin was significantly more effective than ceftazidime in the treatment of nosocomial SBP (86.7 vs. 25%; P < 0.001). Ninety-day transplant-free survival (TFS) was not significantly different between the two groups. In the multivariate analysis, ineffective response to first-line treatment (hazard ratio [HR]: 20.6; P = 0.01), development of acute kidney injury during hospitalization (HR: 23.2; P = 0.01), and baseline mean arterial pressure (HR: 0.92; P = 0.01) were found to be independent predictors of 90-day TFS. CONCLUSION: The combination of meropenem plus daptomycin is more effective than ceftazidime as empirical antibiotic treatment of nosocomial SBP. Efficacy of the empirical antibiotic treatment is a strong predictor of 90-day survival in patients with nosocomial SBP.

Terlipressin plus albumin versus midodrine and octreotide plus albumin in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: A randomized trial.

UNLABELLED: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), a serious complication of cirrhosis, is associated with high mortality without treatment. Terlipressin with albumin is effective in the reversal of HRS. Where terlipressin is not available, as in the United States, midodrine and octreotide with albumin are used as an alternative treatment of HRS. The aim was to compare the effectiveness of terlipressin plus albumin versus midodrine and octreotide plus albumin in the treatment of HRS in a randomized controlled trial. Twenty-seven patients were randomized to receive terlipressin with albumin (TERLI group) and 22 to receive midodrine and octreotide plus albumin (MID/OCT group). The TERLI group received terlipressin by intravenous infusion, initially 3 mg/24 hours, progressively increased to 12 mg/24 hours if there was no response. The MID/OCT group received midodrine orally at an initial dose of 7.5 mg thrice daily, with the dose increased to a maximum of 12.5 mg thrice daily, together with octreotide subcutaneously: initial dose 100 µg thrice daily and up to 200 µg thrice daily. Both groups received albumin intravenously 1 g/kg of body weight on day 1 and 20-40 g/day thereafter. There was a significantly higher rate of recovery of renal function in the TERLI group (19/27, 70.4%) compared to the MID/OCT group (6/21, 28.6%), P = 0.01. Improvement in renal function and lower baseline Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score were associated with better survival. CONCLUSION: Terlipressin plus albumin is significantly more effective than midodrine and octreotide plus albumin in improving renal function in patients with HRS.

Renal failure and bacterial infections in patients with cirrhosis: epidemiology and clinical features.

UNLABELLED: The aim of the study was to investigate the prevalence and clinical course of renal failure that was induced by the various types of bacterial infections in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. Three hundred and nine patients, who were consecutively admitted to the 3 major hospitals of Padova, Italy, during the first 6 months of 2005, were studied prospectively. Of these, 233 patients (75.4%) had evidence of ascites. In 104 patients with cirrhosis and ascites (44.6%) a bacterial infection was diagnosed. A bacterial infection-induced renal failure was observed in 35 of 104 patients (33.6%). The prevalence of renal failure was higher in biliary or gastrointestinal tract infections and in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) and in than in other types of infections. In addition, the progressive form of renal failure was only precipitated by biliary or gastrointestinal tract infections, SBP, and urinary tract infections (UTI). In a multivariate analysis only MELD score (P = 0.001), the peak count of neutrophil leukocyte in blood (P = 0.04), and the lack of resolution of infection (P = 0.03) had an independent predictive value on the occurrence of renal failure. CONCLUSION: The results of the study show that the development of bacterial-induced renal failure in patients with cirrhosis and ascites is related to the MELD score, and to both the severity and the lack of resolution of the infection. A progressive form of renal failure occurs only as a consequence of biliary or gastrointestinal tract infections, SBP, and UTI.