ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Differentiation of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis from Secondary Peritonitis in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis: Retrospective Multicentre Study.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- KASL clinical practice guidelines for liver cirrhosis: Ascites and related complications 2026.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2026Article
- The Prognostic Value of Biomarkers in Patients Diagnosed with Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Early Diagnosis of Spontaneous Fungal Peritonitis/Fungiascites in Hospitalized Cirrhotic Patients with Ascites: A Case-Control Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Differentiation of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis from Secondary Peritonitis in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis: Retrospective Multicentre Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ascitic fluid infection is a serious complication of liver cirrhosis. The distinction between the more common spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) and the less common secondary peritonitis in patients with liver cirrhosis is crucial due to the varying treatment approaches. This retrospective multicentre study was conducted in three German hospitals and analysed 532 SBP episodes and 37 secondary peritonitis episodes. Overall, >30 clinical, microbiological, and laboratory parameters were evaluated to identify key differentiation criteria. Microbiological characteristics in ascites followed by severity of illness and clinicopathological parameters in ascites were the most important predictors identified by a random forest model to distinguish between SBP and secondary peritonitis. To establish a point-score model, a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression model selected the ten most promising discriminatory features. By aiming at a sensitivity of 95% either to rule out or rule in SBP episodes, two cut-off scores were defined, dividing patients with infected ascites into a low-risk (score ≥ 45) and high-risk group (score < 25) for secondary peritonitis. Overall, the discrimination of secondary peritonitis from SBP remains challenging. Our univariable analyses, random forest model, and LASSO point score may help clinicians with the crucial differentiation between SBP and secondary peritonitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.