The role of mesalazine co-treatment in the prevention of recurrence in subjects with subclinical inflammatory bowel disease and perianal fistula who are scheduled for surgical intervention

dc.contributor.authorAkturk, Remzi
dc.contributor.authorSerinsoz, Serdar
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-13T10:33:33Z
dc.date.available2024-03-13T10:33:33Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.departmentİstanbul Beykent Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractAIM: To investigate the impact of mesalazine co-treatment in addition to the surgical intervention on recurrence rate in subjects with subclinical inflammatory bowel disease (SIBD) who present with perianal fistula (PAF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients who had undergone surgery for PAF in our institutes were included in this retrospective analysis. Ileal tissue samples were obtained during colonoscopy for pathological evaluation. Patients with active chronic ileitis, structural distortion, erosion, ulceration, cryptitis, crypt abscess, fibrosis, and Paneth cell hyperplasia were defined as SIBD. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of SIBD on pathological evaluation of ileal tissue samples (Group 1: SIBD +; Group 2: SIBD -). Rectal 5-aminosalicylic acid (mesalazine) of 2 gr once daily was administered to half of the subjects in each group for 8 weeks. The difference in 6 months recurrence rates of subjects receiving or not receiving mesalazine was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: The overall recurrence rate of subjects not receiving mesalazine was significantly higher than that of the subjects receiving mesalazine (9.7% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.020). Recurrence rate of the subjects with SIBD who received mesalazineco-treatment was significantly lower than those without mesalazine (1.6% vs. 12.6%, p=0.002). However, recurrence rate of the subjects without SIBD who received and not received mesalazine co-treatment was similar (6.8% vs. 7.8%, p=0.764). CONCLUSION: Mesalazine co-treatment in addition to the surgical intervention was associated with lower 6 months recurrence rate compared to surgical intervention alone in patients with SIBD and PAF.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage187en_US
dc.identifier.issn0003-469X
dc.identifier.issn2239-253X
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.pmid35311735en_US
dc.identifier.startpage183en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12662/4033
dc.identifier.volume93en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000886952800008en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherEdizioni Luigi Pozzien_US
dc.relation.ispartofAnnali Italiani Di Chirurgiaen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectInflammatory bowel diseaseen_US
dc.subjectMesalazineen_US
dc.subjectPerianal fistulaen_US
dc.titleThe role of mesalazine co-treatment in the prevention of recurrence in subjects with subclinical inflammatory bowel disease and perianal fistula who are scheduled for surgical interventionen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar