Chronic Antibiotic-Refractory Pouchitis: Management Challenges
- PMID: 34163205
- PMCID: PMC8213947
- DOI: 10.2147/CEG.S219556
Chronic Antibiotic-Refractory Pouchitis: Management Challenges
Abstract
Background: Pouchitis is the most common long-term complication in patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. The incidence of acute pouchitis is 20% after 1 year and up to 40% after 5 years. Chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis develops in approximately 10% of patients.
Aim: To present a narrative review of published literature regarding the management of chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis.
Methods: Current relevant literature was summarized and critically evaluated.
Results: Clear definitions should be used to classify pouchitis into acute versus chronic, and responsive versus dependent versus refractory to antibiotics. Before treatment is started for chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis, secondary causes should be ruled out. There is a need for validated scoring systems to measure the severity of the disease. Because chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis is a rare condition, only small studies with often a poor study design have been performed. Treatments with antibiotics, aminosalicylates, steroids, immunomodulators and biologics have shown to be effective and safe for chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis. Also, treatments with AST-120, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, tacrolimus enemas, and granulocyte and monocyte apheresis suggested some efficacy.
Conclusion: The available data are weak but suggest that therapeutic options for chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis are similar to the treatment strategies for inflammatory bowel diseases. However, randomized controlled trials are warranted to further identify the best treatment options in this patient population.
Keywords: biologics; chronic antibiotic-refractory pouchitis; inflammatory bowel disease.
© 2021 Outtier and Ferrante.
Conflict of interest statement
Marc Ferrante received financial support for research from AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Humira, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda; consultancy fees from AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celltrion, Janssen, Lilly, Medtronic, MSD, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda and Thermo Fisher; and speakers fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Falk, Ferring, Janssen, Lamepro, MSD, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda and Truvion Healthcare. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.
References
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
