Danny Issa, Sanjeev Solomon, Jonathan Hillyard, Brian Di Pace, Christopher Young, Patricia Uber, Adam Sima, Reem Sharaiha, George Smallfield
{"title":"上消化道出血内镜检查前输注阿奇霉素与红霉素。","authors":"Danny Issa, Sanjeev Solomon, Jonathan Hillyard, Brian Di Pace, Christopher Young, Patricia Uber, Adam Sima, Reem Sharaiha, George Smallfield","doi":"10.21037/tgh-20-51","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intravenous erythromycin prior to endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) improves outcomes but requires immediate preparation delaying administration in emergency cases. Azithromycin is readily available and does not require prolonged preparation. The aim of the study was to assess the effect of azithromycin in improving the quality of endoscopic visualization in upper GIB compared to erythromycin.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients admitted with upper GIB who received erythromycin or azithromycin before urgent endoscopy were included. Primary outcome of the quality of visualization was assessed by two gastroenterologists, blinded to the choice of infusion, using a scoring system ranging from 0 to 8, with a maximum of 2 points assigned to the fundus, body, antrum and bulb.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-six patients were included; 25 received azithromycin and 41 received erythromycin. Mean total visualization score was significantly higher with azithromycin compared to that with erythromycin (6.8±1.4 <i>vs.</i> 5.5±2.2, respectively; P=0.01) and remained significant after adjusting for confounders (Diff: 0.01, 1.88; P=0.05). Secondary outcomes analyses showed a shorter LOS when given azithromycin compared to erythromycin [6 (3 to 9) <i>vs.</i> 8 (7 to 16) days, respectively, 95% CI: 1.03, 3.89; P=0.04]. Time between initiating the infusion and endoscopy was longer with azithromycin (Diff: 40.64 min; 95% CI: 7.23, 74.05; P=0.02). Need for second look endoscopy, procedure time, blood transfusion requirements and procedure-related complications did not differ between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Azithromycin infusion before endoscopy for upper GIB was associated with better visualization than that of erythromycin. Randomized trials are needed to validate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":23267,"journal":{"name":"Translational gastroenterology and hepatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e6/5f/tgh-07-20-51.PMC9468987.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Azithromycin versus erythromycin infusions prior to endoscopy in upper gastrointestinal bleeding.\",\"authors\":\"Danny Issa, Sanjeev Solomon, Jonathan Hillyard, Brian Di Pace, Christopher Young, Patricia Uber, Adam Sima, Reem Sharaiha, George Smallfield\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/tgh-20-51\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intravenous erythromycin prior to endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) improves outcomes but requires immediate preparation delaying administration in emergency cases. Azithromycin is readily available and does not require prolonged preparation. The aim of the study was to assess the effect of azithromycin in improving the quality of endoscopic visualization in upper GIB compared to erythromycin.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients admitted with upper GIB who received erythromycin or azithromycin before urgent endoscopy were included. Primary outcome of the quality of visualization was assessed by two gastroenterologists, blinded to the choice of infusion, using a scoring system ranging from 0 to 8, with a maximum of 2 points assigned to the fundus, body, antrum and bulb.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-six patients were included; 25 received azithromycin and 41 received erythromycin. Mean total visualization score was significantly higher with azithromycin compared to that with erythromycin (6.8±1.4 <i>vs.</i> 5.5±2.2, respectively; P=0.01) and remained significant after adjusting for confounders (Diff: 0.01, 1.88; P=0.05). Secondary outcomes analyses showed a shorter LOS when given azithromycin compared to erythromycin [6 (3 to 9) <i>vs.</i> 8 (7 to 16) days, respectively, 95% CI: 1.03, 3.89; P=0.04]. Time between initiating the infusion and endoscopy was longer with azithromycin (Diff: 40.64 min; 95% CI: 7.23, 74.05; P=0.02). Need for second look endoscopy, procedure time, blood transfusion requirements and procedure-related complications did not differ between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Azithromycin infusion before endoscopy for upper GIB was associated with better visualization than that of erythromycin. Randomized trials are needed to validate these findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational gastroenterology and hepatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e6/5f/tgh-07-20-51.PMC9468987.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational gastroenterology and hepatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/tgh-20-51\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational gastroenterology and hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/tgh-20-51","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Azithromycin versus erythromycin infusions prior to endoscopy in upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Background: Intravenous erythromycin prior to endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) improves outcomes but requires immediate preparation delaying administration in emergency cases. Azithromycin is readily available and does not require prolonged preparation. The aim of the study was to assess the effect of azithromycin in improving the quality of endoscopic visualization in upper GIB compared to erythromycin.
Methods: Patients admitted with upper GIB who received erythromycin or azithromycin before urgent endoscopy were included. Primary outcome of the quality of visualization was assessed by two gastroenterologists, blinded to the choice of infusion, using a scoring system ranging from 0 to 8, with a maximum of 2 points assigned to the fundus, body, antrum and bulb.
Results: Sixty-six patients were included; 25 received azithromycin and 41 received erythromycin. Mean total visualization score was significantly higher with azithromycin compared to that with erythromycin (6.8±1.4 vs. 5.5±2.2, respectively; P=0.01) and remained significant after adjusting for confounders (Diff: 0.01, 1.88; P=0.05). Secondary outcomes analyses showed a shorter LOS when given azithromycin compared to erythromycin [6 (3 to 9) vs. 8 (7 to 16) days, respectively, 95% CI: 1.03, 3.89; P=0.04]. Time between initiating the infusion and endoscopy was longer with azithromycin (Diff: 40.64 min; 95% CI: 7.23, 74.05; P=0.02). Need for second look endoscopy, procedure time, blood transfusion requirements and procedure-related complications did not differ between the groups.
Conclusions: Azithromycin infusion before endoscopy for upper GIB was associated with better visualization than that of erythromycin. Randomized trials are needed to validate these findings.
期刊介绍:
Translational Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol; TGH; Online ISSN 2415-1289) is an open-access, peer-reviewed online journal that focuses on cutting-edge findings in the field of translational research in gastroenterology and hepatology and provides current and practical information on diagnosis, prevention and clinical investigations of gastrointestinal, pancreas, gallbladder and hepatic diseases. Specific areas of interest include, but not limited to, multimodality therapy, biomarkers, imaging, biology, pathology, and technical advances related to gastrointestinal and hepatic diseases. Contributions pertinent to gastroenterology and hepatology are also included from related fields such as nutrition, surgery, public health, human genetics, basic sciences, education, sociology, and nursing.