Jared M Huston1, Laura Kreiner2, Vanessa P Ho2, James M Sanders3, Therese M Duane4. 1. Departments of Surgery and Science Education, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, New York. 2. Department of Surgery, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, The MetroHealth System, Cleveland, Ohio. 3. Department of Pharmacy, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, Texas. 4. Department of Surgery, John Peter Smith Health Network, Fort Worth, Texas.
Abstract
Background: Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) affects four million people worldwide. Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) occurs in less than 15% of cases but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates. Administration of antibiotics is standard treatment for gastrointestinal perforations, including PPU. Although fungal growth is common in peritoneal fluid cultures from patients with PPU, current data suggest empiric anti-fungal therapy fails to improve outcomes. To examine the role of anti-fungal agents in the treatment of PPU, the Surgical Infection Society hosted an Update Symposium at its 37th Annual Meeting. Here, we provide a synopsis of the symposium's findings and a brief review of prospective and retrospective reports on the subject. Methods: A search of Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed between January 1, 2000, and November 1, 2018, comparing outcomes of PPU following empiric anti-fungal treatment versus no anti-fungal therapy. We used the search terms "perforated peptic ulcer," "gastroduodenal ulcer," "anti-fungal," and "perforated" or "perforation." Results: There are no randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes specifically for patients with PPU treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. We identified one randomized multi-center trial evaluating outcomes for patients with intra-abdominal perforations, including PPU, that were treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. We identified one single-center prospective series and three additional retrospective studies comparing outcomes for patients with PPU treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. Conclusion: The current evidence reviewed here does not demonstrate efficacy of anti-fungal agents in improving outcomes in patients with PPU. As such, we caution against the routine use of empiric anti-fungal agents in these patients. Further studies should help identify specific subpopulations of patients who might derive benefit from anti-fungal therapy and help define appropriate treatment regimens and durations that minimize the risk of resistance, adverse events, and cost.
Background: Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) affects four million people worldwide. Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) occurs in less than 15% of cases but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates. Administration of antibiotics is standard treatment for gastrointestinal perforations, including PPU. Although fungal growth is common in peritoneal fluid cultures from patients with PPU, current data suggest empiric anti-fungal therapy fails to improve outcomes. To examine the role of anti-fungal agents in the treatment of PPU, the Surgical Infection Society hosted an Update Symposium at its 37th Annual Meeting. Here, we provide a synopsis of the symposium's findings and a brief review of prospective and retrospective reports on the subject. Methods: A search of Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed between January 1, 2000, and November 1, 2018, comparing outcomes of PPU following empiric anti-fungal treatment versus no anti-fungal therapy. We used the search terms "perforated peptic ulcer," "gastroduodenal ulcer," "anti-fungal," and "perforated" or "perforation." Results: There are no randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes specifically for patients with PPU treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. We identified one randomized multi-center trial evaluating outcomes for patients with intra-abdominal perforations, including PPU, that were treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. We identified one single-center prospective series and three additional retrospective studies comparing outcomes for patients with PPU treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. Conclusion: The current evidence reviewed here does not demonstrate efficacy of anti-fungal agents in improving outcomes in patients with PPU. As such, we caution against the routine use of empiric anti-fungal agents in these patients. Further studies should help identify specific subpopulations of patients who might derive benefit from anti-fungal therapy and help define appropriate treatment regimens and durations that minimize the risk of resistance, adverse events, and cost.
Authors: Belinda De Simone; Elie Chouillard; Almino C Ramos; Gianfranco Donatelli; Tadeja Pintar; Rahul Gupta; Federica Renzi; Kamal Mahawar; Brijesh Madhok; Stefano Maccatrozzo; Fikri M Abu-Zidan; Ernest E Moore; Dieter G Weber; Federico Coccolini; Salomone Di Saverio; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Vishal G Shelat; Francesco Amico; Emmanouil Pikoulis; Marco Ceresoli; Joseph M Galante; Imtiaz Wani; Nicola De' Angelis; Andreas Hecker; Gabriele Sganga; Edward Tan; Zsolt J Balogh; Miklosh Bala; Raul Coimbra; Dimitrios Damaskos; Luca Ansaloni; Massimo Sartelli; Nikolaos Parasas; Yoram Kluger; Elias Chahine; Vanni Agnoletti; Gustavo Fraga; Walter L Biffl; Fausto Catena Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2022-09-27 Impact factor: 8.165
Authors: Galinos Barmparas; Adel Alhaj Saleh; Raymond Huang; Barbara C Eaton; Brandon R Bruns; Alexander Raines; Cressilee Bryant; Christopher E Crane; Elizabeth P Scherer; Thomas J Schroeppel; Eliza Moskowitz; Justin L Regner; Richard Frazee; Eric M Campion; Matthew Bartley; Jared R Mortus; Jeremy Ward; Daniel R Margulies; Sharmila Dissanaike Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2021-05-19