Azathioprine is More Effective than Mesalazine at Preventing Recurrent Bowel Obstruction in Patients with Ileocecal Crohn’s Disease

BACKGROUND Patients with subocclusive Crohn's disease (CD) who received azathioprine (AZA) therapy had lower re-hospitalization rates due to all causes and for surgical management of CD compared to those treated with mesalazine during a 3-year period. We investigated whether AZA also was effective for prevention of recurrent bowel obstruction. MATERIAL/METHODS Rates of recurrent bowel occlusion were compared between patients treated with AZA and those treated with mesalazine. We assessed the time interval-off intestinal obstruction as well as the occlusion-free survival for both groups. RESULTS There was a significantly lower cumulative rate of patients with recurrent subocclusion in the AZA group (56%) compared with the mesalazine group (79%; OR 3.34, 95% CI 1.67-8.6; P=0.003), with the number needed to treat in order to prevent 1 subocclusion episode of 3.7 favoring AZA. The occlusion-free time interval was longer in the AZA group compared with the mesalazine group (28.8 vs. 18.3 months; P=0.000). The occlusion-free survival at 12, 24, and 36 months was significantly higher in the AZA group (91%, 81%, and 72%, respectively) than in the mesalazine group (64.7%, 35.3%, and 23.5%, respectively; P<0.05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS In an exploratory analysis of patients with subocclusive ileocecal CD, maintenance therapy with AZA is more effective than mesalazine for eliminating or postponing recurrent intestinal obstruction during 3 years of therapy.