Determining the Risk of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitisdue to increase use of Proton Pump Inhibitors among cirrhotic patients with ascites

Objectives: The current study aimed to determine the Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis (SBP) risk due to increased use of Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) among cirrhotic patients with ascites. Methods: This retrospective case-control study was conducted at Chandka Medical College & Hospital, Larkana from March 2013 to February 2014, involving 215 cirrhotic patients with ascites. Paracentesis was performed to distinguish cirrhotic patients with SBP and Polymorphonuclear Neutrophil (PMN) count ≥ 250 neutrophils/mm3 (cases) and non-SBP with PMN count < 250 neutrophils/mm3 (controls). The demographic details, history of PPIs use before admission and duration of Chronic Liver Disease (CLD) were inquired and statistical analysis was carried through SPSS Version 23.0. Results: Increased pre-hospital PPI intake was observed among cirrhotic patients with SBP (69.8%) as compared to those without SBP (48.8%; p = 0.014). The mean duration of PPI use was 19.16 ± 4.772 days, and it was more significant among older cirrhotic patients (p < 0.05). Increased duration of CLD was observed among PPI users, i.e. 20.47 ± 6.305 months vs. 18.95 ± 5.527 months among non-PPI users (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Our results show that cirrhotic patients with ascites consuming PPIs are more likely to develop SBP as compared to non-PPI users. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.4.3476 How to cite this:Shaikh BA, Shaikh ZA, Shah AH, Kumar A. Determining the Risk of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis due to increase use of Proton Pump Inhibitors among cirrhotic patients with ascites. Pak J Med Sci. 2021;37(4):---------.   doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.4.3476 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.