# Different treatments for Crohn’s disease complicated by severe acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: infliximab therapy is critical and cannot be ignored

## TL;DR

Infliximab therapy is more effective and economical than surgery or traditional treatments for severe gastrointestinal bleeding in Crohn’s disease.

## Contribution

Demonstrates infliximab's superior anti-inflammatory effects and lower rebleeding risk compared to existing treatments for Crohn’s-related bleeding.

## Key findings

- Infliximab therapy showed significantly lower rebleeding risk compared to surgery and traditional therapy.
- Infliximab had higher anti-inflammatory effects, as shown by better CRP and ESR reduction.
- Infliximab therapy was more economical than surgery, with similar hemoglobin improvement.

## Abstract

Acute severe lower gastrointestinal bleeding (SLGIB) is one of the life-threatening complications of Crohn’s disease (CD) whose therapy is being optimized constantly. We aim to evaluate the therapeutic efficacies and economic benefits of different treatments for acute SLGIB in CD.

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted in Hunan Province of China on CD patients with acute SLGIB; here, we analyzed the clinical (hemostatic effects, hemoglobin improvement, rebleeding risk, anti-inflammatory influence, and complications) and economic (duration and cost of hospital stay) characteristics of infliximab, surgical, and traditional hemostatic therapies.

All three groups showed no obvious signs of bleeding in the first week. The negative conversion rates of C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) in the infliximab therapy group were significantly higher than those in the other two groups (adjusted-p < 0.05 for both CRP and ESR), while the increase in hemoglobin did not differ significantly among the three groups (p = 0.298). The incidence of post-treatment complications was significantly higher in the surgery (resection) group than the other two groups (adjusted-p < 0.05). Cumulative rebleeding risk was lowest in the infliximab therapy group (p = 0.001 vs. surgery and p = 0.032 vs. traditional therapy). The multivariate COX regression also revealed that surgery [hazard ratio (HR) = 7.270, 95% confidence interval (CI): (1.574, 33.592), p = 0.011] and traditional therapy [HR = 4.395, 95% CI: (1.011, 19.113), p = 0.048] were independently related to higher rebleeding risk than infliximab therapy. The duration and cost of hospital stay of the infliximab therapy group were significantly lower than those of the surgery group (adjusted-p < 0.05) and similar to those of the traditional therapy group (adjusted-p > 0.05).

Compared to surgery and traditional therapy (such as somatostatins or octreotide), infliximab therapy could control acute SLGIB in CD as well as achieve similar improvement in hemoglobin level with additional anti-inflammatory effects and lower rebleeding risk. Furthermore, infliximab therapy was found to be more economical than surgery.