fruitgirl said...
Because there's no reason, IMO, to expose the patient to the possible VERY SEVERE side effects that can come with even a short course of pred if it's not warranted. Mesalamine alone can make a very big difference very quickly, even in severe cases. I was in a severe flare when I was diagnosed -- upwards of 15-20 very urgent BMs a day, drastic weight loss, low fever, high pulse, etc. My doc started me on Asacol alone for the first 7-10 days (I can't remember how long) and after seeing very limited improvement, added the mesalamine enemas. I had a DRASTIC improvement almost immediately. I almost achieved remisison, then caught a tummy bug from my son which stirred the flare up again. At that point, I had an interview quickly approaching and I had to get well ASAP. So we started pred.
My perception was that Asacol or mesalamine enemas took longer to start providing relief. If your experience is typical, I completely agree with you. Still, I think you're exaggerating the risk of prednisone by characterising the possible side effects of a short term cycle as "VERY SEVERE". Prednisone's anger lies more in long-term use. It really is a wonder drug for buying some time in the short-term to allow other drugs to begin providing relief, sort of a relay race where prednisone starts the race and some other drug takes the baton for the marathon.
fruitgirl said...
I think there's good reason to see if there will be a fast response to mesalamine alone, if the patient isn't on death's door and can get by despite the symptoms.
I don't like this attitude towards the drug, prednisone is not some ultra-risky drug to be used only as a last resort when a patient is on "death's door". Yes, it is highly unpleasant, but it is a drug that has many decades of research and use behind it, as many millions of successful applications. Moreover, procrastinating intervention with prednisone can lead to a worsening of one's condition in both the short term and long term, with risks I am sure you are familiar with.