Ciprofloxacin or metronidazole for the treatment of perianal fistulas in patients with Crohnʼs disease: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although metronidazole and ciprofloxacin are used to treat perianal Crohn's disease (CD), no placebo-controlled trials have been performed. METHODS: We performed a placebo-controlled pilot trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of metronidazole and ciprofloxacin in patients with perianal CD. Twenty-five patients with CD and actively draining perianal fistulas were randomized to receive ciprofloxacin 500 mg, metronidazole 500 mg, or placebo twice daily for 10 weeks. Remission and response of perianal fistulas were defined as closure of all fistulas and closure of at least 50% of fistulas that were draining at baseline, respectively. The primary endpoint was remission at 10 weeks. RESULTS: Ten patients were randomized to ciprofloxacin, 7 to metronidazole, and 8 to placebo. Remission at week 10 occurred in 3 patients (30%) treated with ciprofloxacin, no patients (0%) treated with metronidazole, and 1 patient (12.5%) treated with placebo (P = 0.41). Response at week 10 occurred in 4 patients (40%) treated with ciprofloxacin, 1 patient (14.3%) treated with metronidazole, and 1 patient (12.5%) treated with placebo (P = 0.43). Termination of the trial prior to week 10 occurred in 1 patient (10%) treated with ciprofloxacin, 5 patients (71.4%) treated with metronidazole, and 1 patient (12.5%) treated with placebo (P < 0.02). No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Remission and response occurred more frequently in patients treated with ciprofloxacin but the differences were not significant in this pilot study. Ciprofloxacin was well tolerated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".