P472 Cyclosporine versus infliximab in patients with Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis: A single-centre retrospective study

Karpavičiūtė, V.(1)*;Kiudelis, G.(2);Kupčinskas, J.(2);Kupčinskas, L.(2);

(1)Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinics, Department of Gastroenterology, Kaunas, Lithuania;(2)Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinics, Department of Gastroenterology- Medical Academy, Kaunas, Lithuania;


In steroid refractory acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC), cyclosporine or infliximab are potential rescue treatments to avoid colectomy. Our objective is to assess the short-term and long-term efficacy and safety of cyclosporine versus infliximab as rescue agents.


We performed a retrospective analysis of 121 patients admitted with ASUC to a single gastroenterology centre during 2010-2020. ASUC was defined by the Truelove & Witts criteria. Primary outcome was short-term colectomy-free rate, secondary outcomes were severe adverse events, re-hospitalization or need of treatment with steroids within 2 years due to flare ups and colectomy rate at 2-year follow-up.


119 patients initially received intravenous corticosteroids, while 2 patients underwent emergency colectomy on the first day. Sixty-four (53%) were females, median age of all patients was 33 (IQR 27-49) years. 66 (55%) patients responded to intravenous corticosteroids (IVS), while 53 (45%) failed to respond to steroid therapy: 45 (37%) patients received second-line rescue therapy (29 with cyclosporine, 16 with infliximab). Evaluating the short-term efficacy of treatment there was no significant difference between cyclosporine and infliximab: during admission colectomy was performed in 10.3% vs. 12.5% of patients, respectively (p=0.826). In terms of long-term outcomes, the colectomy rate was higher in the infliximab group at 2-year follow-up, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (10.3% vs. 31.2%, p=0.079). The need for oral steroids during follow-up was comparable in both groups (38,5% vs. 50%, p=0.481). Comparing patients who did not undergo colectomy, patients in the infliximab group were more often re-hospitalized due to the need for IVS at 2-year follow-up (7.7% vs. 50%, p=0.002). No severe side effects due to infliximab and cyclosporine were observed.


In the treatment of steroid refractory ASUC infliximab and cyclosporine were equally effective in short-term period and there was no difference in safety, however cyclosporine treated patients trended to have better long-term outcomes, with significantly rarer re-hospitalization. Additional analysis is needed for other factors that may have contributed to differences in long-term outcomes between the cyclosporine and infliximab groups.