The Long-term Prophylactic Effect of Salazosulfapyridine (Salazopyrin^R) in Primarily Resected Patients with Crohn's Disease

Validating Crohnʼs disease activity indices for use in assessing postoperative recurrence

“…However, unlike the present study, they did not go on to address how well the CDAI determined clinical postoperative recurrence. A review of the various postoperative interventional studies that have been performed over the last 30 years [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] confirms that most investigators have presented both endoscopic and clinical outcomes (Table 3). However, while there is now remarkable consistency in the assessment of endoscopic recurrence, with virtually universal uptake of the Rutgeerts endoscopic scoring system in clinical trials, the determination of clinical recurrence remains quite disparate.…”

Postoperative Recurrence of Crohn’s Disease in Relation to Radicality of Operation and Sulfasalazine Prophylaxis: A Multicenter Trial

“…In other reports a rather lower recurrence rate is re ported after radical resection than after non radical operation [ 15,25], However, most of these trials were not prospective, the opera tive procedure and the follow-up were not defined by a protocol and the definition of recurrence was used differently [16]. In the OMGGE study the distance of disease-free margin was > 10 cm or alternatively < 4 cm including patients in whom excision was through diseased tissue [25], The influence of location of disease on recurrence after sur gery as described by others [29] did not play a role in our trial since almost all had ileoce cal involvement, i.e. the site of highest recur rence rate (table 1).…”

“…Although SZ is not as effective in CD as it is in ulcer ative colitis, its therapeutic value is estab lished also for CD in controlled trials [10,26,28]. Two pilot studies have been per formed on the prophylactic effect of SZ in patients resected for CD, both prospectively, randomized, and placebo controlled [6,29], There was a trend towards a more favorable outcome in patients receiving SZ compared to placebo, but the difference did not reach statistical significance possibly due to the small number of patients.…”

Untitled

“…Further, the assessment of disease-activity in relation to evaluation of effects of medical treatment is problematic (63) and since placebo response-rates are high (76), large study-populations are required in order to assess drug-efficacy. In two early studies no significant effect was found in prophylaxis of C D with SASP 4 g daily (7,131), although a trend in one suggested an effect in patients after resective surgery (131). Subsequently, two large placebo-controlled trials used clinical index variables in evaluation of efficacy (70,113).…”