Liver Abscess — Source Control First, Catheter-vs-Needle Arithmetic and Klebsiella Vigilance: Drainage Trials, Duration Evidence and Rupture Doctrine

Definition and framing — a source-control-first disease

Pyogenic liver abscess is a bacterial infection of the liver parenchyma, classified against amoebic disease (Entamoeba histolytica) and rarer fungal/parasitic collections — and the examined doctrine is stated in one line: source control remains the most critical aspect of management, followed by antimicrobial therapy.^[72] Biliary disease is the most common cause of the pyogenic form, most abscesses have an identifiable source outside the liver, and contemporary mortality approaches 15%, driven mostly by patient debilitation and persistence of the underlying cause.^[73][30][48] Counsel with the lethality rule the 1984 New York series established: multiple abscesses, mixed organisms, hyperbilirubinemia and complications all raise mortality, but the lethality of the primary disease process is the most important factor determining survival — control the source and the patient usually survives.^[48] The South African two-hospital series grounds the case mix: 74.77% pyogenic against 16.22% amoebic and 9.01% hydatid — and the treatment of choice for pyogenic disease is the multimodal combination of broad-spectrum antibiotics with aspiration or drainage of larger cavities.^[74][75]

Epidemiology — single-digit incidence, a Taiwanese peak, rising resistance

Quote the population anchors: approximately 7 per 100,000 in Germany, where intensive care was documented in 27% of cases and 9% died within 12 months — most with an underlying malignant disease.^[1] Calgary revisited: incidence rose from 2.3 to 3.7 per 100,000 (p < 0.01) while antimicrobial-resistant isolates climbed from 1% to 8% (p = 0.04), with 30-day mortality 7.4% and polymicrobial bacteremia among its independent risk factors.^[2] The Canadian population study set the classic baseline — 2.3 per 100,000 with 10% dying in hospital — and the 2025 scoping review of 43 population studies names Taiwan, China as the world peak at 17.59 per 100,000.^[3][4] Set the amoebic geography separately: in the Indian meta-analysis of 18 studies, amoebic disease caused 67% of liver abscess — the examiner's reason to weight Entamoeba heavily in South Asian vignettes.^[5]

Risk factors — diabetes dominates incidence but does not decide survival

Diabetes is the dominant risk multiplier: incidence ran 70.2 per 100,000 in the diabetic against 14.7 in the non-diabetic population (adjusted HR 2.18), and the Canadian study measured RR 11.1 for diabetics.^[6][3] Nearly half of abscess patients carry diabetes (48.3% of 377) — yet diabetes itself was not a fatality predictor; creatinine above 1.3 mg/dL (OR 7.3) and gas-forming nature (OR 9.4) were.^[7] Price the outcome: 24 of 227 Xi'an inpatients (10.57%) died of uncontrolled systemic infection and serious complications.^[8]

Microbiology — cryptogenic versus biliary, milleri, ESBL and MDR

In 569 patients the split was cryptogenic 60% versus biliary 22%, and biliary-origin disease grows E. coli (36%) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (23%) — more often as polymicrobial infections.^[10][13] Know the Streptococcus milleri signature cold: most common cause at 51% in the prospective series, monomicrobial in 79%, and 28% of milleri bacteremias stem from a hepatic abscess — milleri bacteremia means hunt the liver.^[11] Biliary disease drives resistance: 21.5% of abscesses in the 817-patient series were biliary in origin and 8.2% were caused by ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae; the MDR series found resistant organisms in 23.0% with polymicrobial infection in 14.6%.^[12][13] Behind all of this sits the Klebsiella emergence story: 12 US cases reported since 1966, then six at one institution alone — including non-Asian, non-diabetic patients — until Klebsiella became that centre's most common pyogenic abscess cause over five years.^[9]

Klebsiella invasive syndrome — eyes, lungs, and the diabetic

A distinct invasive syndrome causing liver abscesses, increasingly reported in Asia and emerging as a global disease, is predisposed by diabetes mellitus and two specific capsular types — with K1, K2, K5, K20, K54 and K57 the serotypes most associated with invasion.^[14][15] The eye is the metastasis the examiner tests: endogenous endophthalmitis in 3.1% of 352 abscesses (mainly K. pneumoniae, mostly poorly controlled diabetics), 42 patients and 53 eyes in the 20-year Taiwanese series with diabetes significant at p = 0.003, and a 7.3% incidence from Klebsiella abscess quadrupling when the cavity exceeds 5 cm.^[16][17][18] Beyond the eye, 9.9% develop metastatic infection — eyes and lungs first — the 18-study meta-analysis (3,133 patients) confirms diabetes at OR 1.93, and the visual-outcome meta-analysis is brutal: 77.9% of endophthalmitis patients finish worse than 3/60.^[19][20][21]

Amoebic abscess — metronidazole first, drain rarely

Approximately 500 million people worldwide carry Entamoeba histolytica, and pleuropulmonary complications occur almost exclusively in individuals with a liver abscess — right-sided effusions, empyema and atelectasis above a right-lobe cavity, with bronchohepatic fistula and anchovy-paste sputum as the classic extension.^[23] Metronidazole remains the treatment of choice: adequate alone in 83% with 5.7% mortality in the Chicago series, and 98% of patients in the comparative cohort treated with amebicidal agents alone — all responded.^[22][25] The modern review position matches: amoebiasis complicates to liver abscess in 9% with ~50,000 ALA deaths in 2010, classic disease responds dramatically to antibiotics, and catheter drainage is necessary in only ~15% — so drain for severity, large left-lobe cavities threatening rupture, or failure to respond, never by default.^[24] Amebic disease can be cured by metronidazole therapy without drainage, and serum qPCR (positive in 17 of 19 amoebic cases with no control positives — 89.5% sensitive, 100% specific) is the examined modern confirmatory test.^[75][87]

Presentation and workup — aspirate everything over 1.5 cm

Amoebic disease presents young, acute and right-upper-quadrant; pyogenic disease presents older, non-specific and chronic, with a left shift and deranged albumin, bilirubin, LDH and transaminases — and the 133-patient audit adds the bedside trio of leukocytosis, hypoalbuminemia and hyperbilirubinemia, with Klebsiella the commonest isolate and diabetes the commonest comorbidity.^[25][26] The workup rule is absolute: aspirate every pyogenic abscess over 1.5 cm for Gram stain and culture, on broad-spectrum cover for gram-negative aerobes plus anaerobes — because pus cultures yield pathogens in 90% while blood cultures catch only 50%, and the IDSA/FDA position stands behind it: cultures of purulent fluid or abscess material are the only valid microbiologic indicators of infection.^[29][27][32] Expect polymicrobial reality: abscess and blood cultures ran positive in 77.1% and 50% respectively, with 44.4% polymicrobial infection in the comparative series.^[76]

Imaging — ultrasound first, CT when it misses

Ultrasound is the modality of choice and will detect almost 100% of abscesses — but the emergency-department series measured 85.8% sensitivity with 38 false negatives needing CT, so a negative ultrasound with persistent suspicion earns a scan.^[27][28] CT remains the most effective method in diagnosis and therapy guidance, with percutaneous US/CT-guided drainage successful in 80% under strict criteria — while small abscesses and large tumor-mimics remain the documented diagnostic difficulty.^[31][48]

Drainage — catheter wins, with fenced exceptions

Quote the landmark pair first: 543 randomized patients conclude catheter drainage is more efficient than needle aspiration for both amoebic and pyogenic abscesses — while the 64-patient pyogenic RCT found needle aspiration trending to higher success with shorter stay and lower mortality without reaching significance, the honest fence against catheter absolutism.^[33][34] The threshold RCT sets the multiloculation rule: needle aspiration succeeded in 67% but catheters cured 100%, with zero multiloculated successes by needle — and in large abscesses, 86% versus 97% (ns) with faster clinical relief by catheter (10.2 versus 8.1 days, p = 0.02).^[35][36] The amoebic-large RCT agrees: 82 patients over 10 cm, 80% by aspiration (often needing two or three passes) against 90.5% by catheter.^[37] Meta-analyses close the argument: 15 RCTs and 1,626 patients favour catheters (RR 1.21) with recurrence RR 0.41; 10 trials and 1,287 patients confirm (RR 1.16) under trial sequential analysis; 12 RCTs and 1,425 patients give OR 4.12.^[38][39][40] The early evidence already pointed the same way: the 50-patient RCT randomized 25 per arm to aspiration versus catheter, the 100-patient prospective randomization found 88% versus 92% success, the earliest meta-analysis (5 RCTs, 306 patients) favoured catheters (RR 0.81), and the 15-RCT, 1,676-patient update confirmed it (RR 1.23) — with one retrospective counterweight finding single-attempt success in 86.4% of aspirations versus 60% of catheter placements (p = 0.08, ns) at 2.4% 30-day mortality.^{[77][78][79][80][81]}

Size, multiples, and medium abscesses — the exceptions that pass vivas

Drainage becomes necessary at 5 cm and above, the French review sets the catheter threshold above 5 cm — and the 60-patient 5-10 cm comparison found equal success (80% versus 84%), so either modality is defensible in medium cavities.^[43][44][42] Multiple abscesses do not mandate catheters everywhere: 92.3% of 39 multiple-abscess patients were managed with a single aspiration in one session and none recurred over 7-42 months.^[41]

Antibiotics — short IV, oral tail, and the short-course evidence

The standard is percutaneous drainage plus IV broad-spectrum antibiotics with enteric aerobic and anaerobic activity: classically 2 weeks IV followed by a prolonged oral course, and the French review sets 4-6 weeks by clinical evolution.^[45][27][44] The duration literature supports de-escalation: pooled mean 32.7 days across 16 studies (3,933 patients), and the 2026 emulated target trial (259 short, 170 long) found a relapse-free-survival risk difference of −0.4% (95% CI −5.9 to 4.9%) — long courses add nothing after adequate drainage.^[46][47] The earliest short-course signal — half the 1990 cohort treated for 2 weeks or less with no recurrences — now reads as hypothesis confirmed by the emulated trial.^[82]

Biliary source, ERCP, and recurrent pyogenic cholangitis

Cholangitis from extrahepatic biliary obstruction was the most common source at 31% — so every abscess needs a biliary workup, and ERCP delivers: 90% success at median 8 days with abnormalities in 46% (stones, strictures, dilatation, fistulae, abscess-biliary communication), guiding sphincterotomy and stone extraction.^[48][49] Recurrent pyogenic cholangitis is the examined biliary subtype: left-lobe predominance (51.9% versus 23.6%), intrahepatic stones in 81.6% of RPC cohorts with cholangiocarcinoma in 7.4% — and surgical management halves recurrence risk (HR 0.40).^[50][51][52] In E. coli abscesses the biliary share runs 66.7% with 26.4% mortality, predicted by underlying malignancy, albumin under 2.5 g/dL and multiple abscesses.^[53] Biliary-origin disease is more likely E. coli and more often polymicrobial — and biliary-related cases carry high recurrence and infection-related death, which is why the workup never stops at the cavity.^[83]

Surgery — failed percutaneous, localised disease, laparoscopy

Operate for two reasons: failed non-operative treatment (76% of the 49-patient hepatectomy series) or underlying hepatobiliary pathology (20%) — with resection reserved for concomitant localised intrahepatic disease or tumour after sepsis control.^[54][43] Laparoscopy is the examined salvage: 17 of 20 large (6-25 cm) abscesses drained successfully after failed percutaneous therapy, with the systematic review reporting 90.5% mean success and zero conversion.^[55][56] Frame the era honestly: percutaneous success runs 70-93% at 1-11% mortality against open surgical drainage at 51-70% with 11-43% — and the 1984 series (surgical 26% versus nonsurgical 95% mortality) is pre-percutaneous history, never a modern comparator.^[57][48]

Complications — rupture, shock, and the ICU

Rupture into peritoneum historically killed a third (75% for intestinal perforation) — yet modern catheter management rewrites it: 117 ruptured amoebic abscesses with 100% technical and clinical success by US-guided drainage, and 100% survival in the critically-ill ruptured cohort.^[58][59][60] In endemic zones the burden is surgical: among 3,464 acute abdomens, 63 ruptured amoebic abscesses presented as parasitic peritonitis.^[84] Septic shock complicates roughly 1 in 12 (30 of 358, 6.1% fatality) to 1 in 6 (16.1% with 2.2% in-hospital death in 453 patients) — and once in ICU, mortality is 28%, dominated by diabetes (51%) and Klebsiella (74%).^[61][62][64] Stratify with MEDS (AUC 0.829, 15% case fatality) and the French predictors (unfavourable outcome 30.1%, hepatic metastases HR 2.08, portal thrombosis HR 3.53); the POLAIR ICU cohort (335 patients, drainage in 62% with 40% inside 48 h, microbiology in 82%) is the modern resuscitation benchmark — fenced in malignancy, where percutaneous success falls to 66% and a quarter die with drains in place, mostly of cancer.^{[63][66][65][67]}

Recurrence and exam fences — fix the bile duct, fence the fads

Recurrence follows etiology: cryptogenic 2.0% and diabetic 4.4% against biliary-tract disease 23.8% across 601 prospective patients — while first episodes carry 7.8% death and 13.7% first-year recurrence, driven independently by multiresistant organisms and cholangitis history.^[68][69] ESBL production independently predicts Klebsiella recurrence (OR 6.3, 18.18% recurred) — but the aspirin HR of 0.50 is a population-cohort hypothesis only, never a prescription.^[70][71] Two special populations close the topic: abscess complicates 2.6% of pancreaticoduodenectomies (antibiotics with or without percutaneous drainage, 12-day stay), and 154 pediatric cases were managed by protocol — so post-Whipple fever with liver lesions and pediatric right-upper-quadrant sepsis both enter the abscess differential.^[85][86]

Revision summary

Source control first, antimicrobials second^[72]; diabetes multiplies incidence (HR 2.18) without deciding survival^[6][7]; biliary disease (E. coli, polymicrobial) versus cryptogenic (Klebsiella) splits microbiology^[10]; Klebsiella demands eye and lung surveillance^[16][19]; amoebic disease yields to metronidazole^[22]; aspirate everything over 1.5 cm^[29]; catheters beat needles except medium and multiple cavities^[38][41][42]; 5 cm mandates drainage^[43]; short antibiotics suffice after drainage^[47]; ERCP clears the biliary source^[49]; RPC needs left-lobe, stone and cholangiocarcinoma awareness with surgical recurrence-halving^[50][51][52]; rupture is now drained, not feared^[59]; shock and ICU arithmetic stratify^[61][64]; and recurrence means re-examine the bile duct^[68].

pyogenic (bacterial, usually polymicrobial-enteric), amoebic (Entamoeba histolytica), fungal/parasitic — with pyogenic ~75% and amoebic ~16% in the South African 222-patient series, and amoebic 67% of liver abscess in the Indian meta-analysis (PMIDs 39744201, 39979548).^[8]

References87ShowHide

1. [1]Zimmermann L, Wendt S, et al. Epidemiology of pyogenic liver abscesses in Germany: Analysis of incidence, risk factors and mortality rate based on routine data from statutory health insurance. United European Gastroenterol J, 2021.PMID 34329537
2. [2]Losie JA, Lam JC, et al. Epidemiology and risk factors for pyogenic liver abscess in the Calgary Health Zone revisited: a population-based study. BMC Infect Dis, 2021.PMID 34507537
3. [3]Kaplan GG, Gregson DB, et al. Population-based study of the epidemiology of and the risk factors for pyogenic liver abscess. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2004.PMID 15551257
4. [4]Wang S, Chang Z, et al. Incidence, Risk Factors, and Subsequent Health Outcomes of Pyogenic Liver Abscesses: A Scoping Review of Evidence From Population-Based Studies. Gastroenterol Res Pract, 2025.PMID 41036110
5. [5]Ghalib SMS, Hashmi F, et al. Epidemiology, risk factors, and clinical characteristics of amoebic liver abscess: a systematic review and meta-analysis from India. Int Microbiol, 2025.PMID 39979548
6. [6]Wang JL, Hsu CR, et al. Diabetes and obesity and risk of pyogenic liver abscess. Sci Rep, 2023.PMID 37193729
7. [7]Foo NP, Chen KT, et al. Characteristics of pyogenic liver abscess patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Am J Gastroenterol, 2010.PMID 19826410
8. [8]Du Z, Zhou X, et al. Effect of diabetes mellitus on short-term prognosis of 227 pyogenic liver abscess patients after hospitalization. BMC Infect Dis, 2020.PMID 32066406
9. [9]Lederman ER, Crum NF, et al. Pyogenic liver abscess with a focus on Klebsiella pneumoniae as a primary pathogen: an emerging disease with unique clinical characteristics. Am J Gastroenterol, 2005.PMID 15667489
10. [10]Shi S, Xia W, et al. Unique characteristics of pyogenic liver abscesses of biliary origin. Surgery, 2016.PMID 26775071
11. [11]Corredoira J, Casariego E, et al. Prospective study of Streptococcus milleri hepatic abscess. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 1998.PMID 9796653
12. [12]Shi SH, Feng XN, et al. Biliary diseases as main causes of pyogenic liver abscess caused by extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Liver Int, 2017.PMID 27718321
13. [13]Long Q, Zhao X, et al. Clinical features and risk factors for pyogenic liver abscess caused by multidrug-resistant organisms: A retrospective study. Virulence, 2024.PMID 38767562
14. [14]Siu LK, Yeh KM, et al. Klebsiella pneumoniae liver abscess: a new invasive syndrome. Lancet Infect Dis, 2012.PMID 23099082
15. [15]Hasan GM, Mohammad T, et al. Klebsiella pneumoniae and pyogenic liver abscess: Emerging clinical threats, virulence mechanisms and therapeutic strategies (Review). Mol Med Rep, 2026.PMID 41543189
16. [16]Chou FF, Kou HK, et al. Endogenous endophthalmitis associated with pyogenic hepatic abscess. J Am Coll Surg, 1996.PMID 8542086
17. [17]Sheu SJ, Kung YH, et al. Risk factors for endogenous endophthalmitis secondary to klebsiella pneumoniae liver abscess: 20-year experience in Southern Taiwan. Retina, 2011.PMID 21499189
18. [18]Kim E, Byon I, et al. Endogenous Endophthalmitis From a Klebsiella pneumoniae Liver Abscess: The Incidence, Risk Factors, and Utility of Imaging. Am J Ophthalmol, 2023.PMID 36963602
19. [19]Yoon JH, Kim YJ, et al. Liver abscess due to Klebsiella pneumoniae: risk factors for metastatic infection. Scand J Infect Dis, 2014.PMID 24228822
20. [20]Chen A, Luo Z, et al. Risk factors for invasive Klebsiella pneumoniae liver abscess syndrome: a meta-analysis. Front Cell Infect Microbiol, 2026.PMID 41674704
21. [21]Chen KY, Chan HC, et al. How does hypervirulent Klebsiella pneumoniae influence the risk and visual outcomes of endogenous endophthalmitis in Klebsiella pneumoniae pyogenic liver abscess? A systematic review and meta analysis. J Infect Public Health, 2026.PMID 41483529
22. [22]Abuabara SF, Barrett JA, et al. Amebic liver abscess. Arch Surg, 1982.PMID 7055436
23. [23]Lyche KD, Jensen WA, et al. Pleuropulmonary amebiasis. Semin Respir Infect, 1997.PMID 9195675
24. [24]Usuda D, Tsuge S, et al. Amebic liver abscess by Entamoeba histolytica. World J Clin Cases, 2022.PMID 36683647
25. [25]Barnes PF, De Cock KM, et al. A comparison of amebic and pyogenic abscess of the liver. Medicine (Baltimore), 1987.PMID 3316923
26. [26]Lee KT, Wong SR, et al. Pyogenic liver abscess: an audit of 10 years' experience and analysis of risk factors. Dig Surg, 2001.PMID 11799296
27. [27]Donovan AJ, Yellin AE, et al. Hepatic abscess. World J Surg, 1991.PMID 2031354
28. [28]Lin AC, Yeh DY, et al. Diagnosis of pyogenic liver abscess by abdominal ultrasonography in the emergency department. Emerg Med J, 2009.PMID 19307388
29. [29]Frey CF, Zhu Y, et al. Liver abscesses. Surg Clin North Am, 1989.PMID 2648615
30. [30]Lardière-Deguelte S, Ragot E, et al. Hepatic abscess: Diagnosis and management. J Visc Surg, 2015.PMID 25770745
31. [31]Witzigmann H, Geissler F, et al. [Intra-abdominal abscess]. Chirurg, 1998.PMID 9782397
32. [32]Solomkin JS, Hemsell DL, et al. Evaluation of new anti-infective drugs for the treatment of intraabdominal infections. Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Food and Drug Administration. Clin Infect Dis, 1992.PMID 1477248
33. [33]Ahmed M, Alam J, et al. Prospective randomized comparative study of percutaneous catheter drainage and percutaneous needle aspiration in the treatment of liver abscess. ANZ J Surg, 2021.PMID 33244881
34. [34]Yu SC, Ho SS, et al. Treatment of pyogenic liver abscess: prospective randomized comparison of catheter drainage and needle aspiration. Hepatology, 2004.PMID 15057896
35. [35]Zerem E, Hadzic A, et al. Sonographically guided percutaneous catheter drainage versus needle aspiration in the management of pyogenic liver abscess. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2007.PMID 17715080
36. [36]Singh O, Gupta S, et al. Comparative study of catheter drainage and needle aspiration in management of large liver abscesses. Indian J Gastroenterol, 2009.PMID 19907956
37. [37]Gupta SS, Singh O, et al. Catheter drainage versus needle aspiration in management of large (>10 cm diameter) amoebic liver abscesses. ANZ J Surg, 2011.PMID 22295386
38. [38]Mahmoud A, Abuelazm M, et al. Percutaneous catheter drainage versus needle aspiration for liver abscess management: an updated systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials. Ann Transl Med, 2023.PMID 37007580
39. [39]Lin JW, Chen CT, et al. Percutaneous catheter drainage versus percutaneous needle aspiration for liver abscess: a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. BMJ Open, 2023.PMID 37518084
40. [40]Xu D, Zeng D, et al. Percutaneous catheter drainage versus needle aspiration for liver abscess: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2026.PMID 42743010
41. [41]Giorgio A, de Stefano G, et al. Percutaneous needle aspiration of multiple pyogenic abscesses of the liver: 13-year single-center experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2006.PMID 17114554
42. [42]S SMR, Bakhshi G, et al. Needle Aspiration Versus Catheter Drainage in Medium-Sized (5-10 cm) Liver Abscesses: A Comparative Study in Mumbai, India. Cureus, 2023.PMID 37261139
43. [43]Chung YF, Tan YM, et al. Management of pyogenic liver abscesses - percutaneous or open drainage? Singapore Med J, 2007.PMID 18043848
44. [44]Ribeiro Da Costa R, Andres A, et al. [Pyogenic liver abscesses]. Rev Med Suisse, 2020.PMID 32997454
45. [45]Sharara AI, Rockey DC, et al. Pyogenic Liver Abscess. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol, 2002.PMID 12408780
46. [46]Curran J, Mulhall C, et al. Antibiotic treatment durations for pyogenic liver abscesses: A systematic review. J Assoc Med Microbiol Infect Dis Can, 2023.PMID 38058494
47. [47]Beydon M, Nguyen Y, et al. Short versus long-course antibiotic therapy for pyogenic liver abscess: an emulated target trial. Clin Microbiol Infect, 2026.PMID 41173337
48. [48]Miedema BW, Dineen P, et al. The diagnosis and treatment of pyogenic liver abscesses. Ann Surg, 1984.PMID 6465983
49. [49]Lam YH, Wong SK, et al. ERCP and pyogenic liver abscess. Gastrointest Endosc, 1999.PMID 10462653
50. [50]Law ST, Li KK, et al. Is pyogenic liver abscess associated with recurrent pyogenic cholangitis a distinct clinical entity? A retrospective analysis over a 10-year period in a regional hospital. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2011.PMID 21716118
51. [51]Tan HL, Koh YX, et al. Surgical management decreases disease recurrence risk in recurrent pyogenic cholangitis. ANZ J Surg, 2018.PMID 29228512
52. [52]You MS, Lee SH, et al. Natural Course and Risk of Cholangiocarcinoma in Patients with Recurrent Pyogenic Cholangitis: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Gut Liver, 2019.PMID 30600674
53. [53]Chen SC, Yen CH, et al. Pyogenic liver abscesses with Escherichia coli: etiology, clinical course, outcome, and prognostic factors. Wien Klin Wochenschr, 2005.PMID 16437317
54. [54]Strong RW, Fawcett J, et al. Hepatectomy for pyogenic liver abscess. HPB (Oxford), 2003.PMID 18332962
55. [55]Tay KH, Ravintharan T, et al. Laparoscopic drainage of liver abscesses. Br J Surg, 1998.PMID 9529485
56. [56]Aydin C, Piskin T, et al. Laparoscopic drainage of pyogenic liver abscess. JSLS, 2010.PMID 21333200
57. [57]Vogl TJ, Estifan F, et al. [Pyogenic liver abscess: interventional versus surgical therapy: technique, results and indications]. Rofo, 2001.PMID 11512241
58. [58]Monga NK, Sood S, et al. Amebic peritonitis. Am J Gastroenterol, 1976.PMID 998599
59. [59]Priyadarshi RN, Prakash V, et al. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous catheter drainage of various types of ruptured amebic liver abscess: a report of 117 cases from a highly endemic zone of India. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2019.PMID 30361869
60. [60]Baijal SS, Agarwal DK, et al. Complex ruptured amebic liver abscesses: the role of percutaneous catheter drainage. Eur J Radiol, 1995.PMID 7556258
61. [61]Cho AR, Lee TH, et al. [Septic Shock in Pyogenic Liver Abscess: Clinical Considerations]. Korean J Gastroenterol, 2016.PMID 27206435
62. [62]Cho H, Lee ES, et al. Predictors of septic shock in initially stable patients with pyogenic liver abscess. Scand J Gastroenterol, 2017.PMID 28270040
63. [63]Kuo SH, Lee YT, et al. Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score as a prognostic indicator in patients with pyogenic liver abscess. Am J Emerg Med, 2013.PMID 23623237
64. [64]Chen W, Chen CH, et al. Clinical outcome and prognostic factors of patients with pyogenic liver abscess requiring intensive care. Crit Care Med, 2008.PMID 18379245
65. [65]Le Goff M, Martino F, et al. Prognosis of liver abscess in the intensive care unit (POLAIR), a multicentre observational study. Crit Care, 2025.PMID 40197508
66. [66]Rossi G, Nguyen Y, et al. Large retrospective study analysing predictive factors of primary treatment failure, recurrence and death in pyogenic liver abscesses. Infection, 2022.PMID 35316531
67. [67]Mezhir JJ, Fong Y, et al. Current management of pyogenic liver abscess: surgery is now second-line treatment. J Am Coll Surg, 2010.PMID 20510807
68. [68]Cheng HC, Chang WL, et al. Long-term outcome of pyogenic liver abscess: factors related with abscess recurrence. J Clin Gastroenterol, 2008.PMID 18458641
69. [69]Czerwonko ME, Huespe P, et al. Pyogenic liver abscess: current status and predictive factors for recurrence and mortality of first episodes. HPB (Oxford), 2016.PMID 27712972
70. [70]Wang H, Ren Y, et al. The increased recurrence rate of liver abscess caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2020.PMID 32062726
71. [71]Liu JS, Lee CH, et al. Aspirin use is associated with reduced risk for recurrence of pyogenic liver abscess: a propensity score analysis. Sci Rep, 2019.PMID 31395935
72. [72]Lam JC, Stokes W, et al. Management of Pyogenic Liver Abscesses: Contemporary Strategies and Challenges. J Clin Gastroenterol, 2023.PMID 37249909
73. [73]Roediger R, Lisker-Melman M, et al. Pyogenic and Amebic Infections of the Liver. Gastroenterol Clin North Am, 2020.PMID 32389368
74. [74]Pillay K, Khan ZA, et al. Clinicopathological presentation of liver abscesses and hydatid liver disease from two South African tertiary hospitals. World J Hepatol, 2024.PMID 39744201
75. [75]Lübbert C, Wiegand J, et al. Therapy of Liver Abscesses. Viszeralmedizin, 2014.PMID 26287275
76. [76]Cosme A, Ojeda E, et al. Pyogenic versus amoebic liver abscesses. A comparative clinical study in a series of 58 patients. Rev Esp Enferm Dig, 2010.PMID 20361845
77. [77]Rajak CL, Gupta S, et al. Percutaneous treatment of liver abscesses: needle aspiration versus catheter drainage. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1998.PMID 9530055
78. [78]Surya M, Bhoil R, et al. Study of ultrasound-guided needle aspiration and catheter drainage in the management of liver abscesses. J Ultrasound, 2020.PMID 32221809
79. [79]Cai YL, Xiong XZ, et al. Percutaneous needle aspiration versus catheter drainage in the management of liver abscess: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford), 2015.PMID 25209740
80. [80]Al-Sayaghi KM, Alhujaily M, et al. Percutaneous needle aspiration versus catheter drainage in the management of liver abscess: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. ANZ J Surg, 2023.PMID 36285842
81. [81]Dulku G, Mohan G, et al. Percutaneous aspiration versus catheter drainage of liver abscess: A retrospective review. Australas Med J, 2015.PMID 25848403
82. [82]Bowers ED, Robison DJ, et al. Pyogenic liver abscess. World J Surg, 1990.PMID 2305584
83. [83]Shi SH, Zhai ZL, et al. Pyogenic Liver Abscess of Biliary Origin: The Existing Problems and Their Strategies. Semin Liver Dis, 2018.PMID 30041279
84. [84]Essomba A, Chichom Mefire A, et al. [Acute abdomens of parasitic origin: retrospective analysis of 135 cases]. Ann Chir, 2006.PMID 16469289
85. [85]Njoku VC, Howard TJ, et al. Pyogenic liver abscess following pancreaticoduodenectomy: risk factors, treatment, and long-term outcome. J Gastrointest Surg, 2014.PMID 24510300
86. [86]Roy Choudhury S, Khan NA, et al. Protocol-based management of 154 cases of pediatric liver abscess. Pediatr Surg Int, 2017.PMID 27826650
87. [87]Ghelfenstein-Ferreira T, Gits-Muselli M, et al. Entamoeba histolytica DNA Detection in Serum from Patients with Suspected Amoebic Liver Abscess. J Clin Microbiol, 2020.PMID 32759355