-
Cureus Mar 2024As the global incidence of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is on the rise, there is a need for better diagnostic criteria, better treatment options, early and... (Review)
Review
As the global incidence of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is on the rise, there is a need for better diagnostic criteria, better treatment options, early and appropriate diagnosis, adequate care, and a multidisciplinary approach to the management of patients. This systematic review explores the role of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in IPF and answers the question, "Does proton pump inhibitor improve only the prognosis of gastroesophageal associated idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis or for other types of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis too?" We used PubMed (PMC) and Google Scholar for data collection for this systematic review and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for conducting this review. After in-depth literature screening and quality appraisal, 12 articles were selected for this systematic review. On the one hand, the efficacy of PPI therapy is supported by research such as the CAPACITY and ASCEND trials, a pilot randomized control trial (RCT) investigating the role of omeprazole in IPF and a bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study, respectively. On the other hand, a systematic review and meta-analysis on antacid and antireflux surgery in IPF negate these results and show no statistical significance. Questions regarding the efficacy of PPI therapy must be dealt with in an adequately powered multicenter and double-blinded randomized control trial. The anti-inflammatory properties of antacids can serve as the cornerstone for future trials. In the following systematic review, antacid, antireflux therapy, omeprazole, and proton pump therapy are synonymous with stomach acid suppression therapy.
PubMed: 38606271
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.55980 -
Cureus Aug 2023Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) refers to the occurrence of an open erosion in the inner lining of the stomach, duodenum, or sometimes lower esophagus. Treatments like proton... (Review)
Review
Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Histamine-2 Receptor Antagonists in the Management of Patients With Peptic Ulcer Disease: A Systematic Review.
Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) refers to the occurrence of an open erosion in the inner lining of the stomach, duodenum, or sometimes lower esophagus. Treatments like proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) are available on the market to efficiently treat the break in the mucosal lining. However, there is little evidence about the effects of the medication on the type and location of the ulcer and the epigastric pain caused by disintegration and increased acidity in the stomach. Given the above, we conducted a systematic review comparing the safety and efficacy of PPIs and H2RAs in various ulcer locations (gastric, duodenal, and pre-pyloric) and the effect of prolonging the treatment with the same medication or changing into a drug from another class in treatment-resistant ulcers. We employed major research literature databases and search engines such as PubMed, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Science Direct, and Google Scholar to find relevant articles. After a thorough screening, a quality check using various tools, and applying filters that suited our eligibility criteria, we identified eight articles, of which five were random clinical trials (RCTs), two review articles, and one meta-analysis. This study compares the different side effects of PPIs and H2RAs. Most studies concluded that omeprazole is superior in healing ulcers and bringing pain relief and that patients resistant to H2RAs can be treated better when switched to a PPI. This study also discusses the adverse effects of chronic use, such as diarrhea, constipation, headaches, and gastrointestinal infections. Patients on long-term PPI therapy are required to take calcium supplements to prevent the risk of fractures in older adults. Regarding long-term outcomes, PPIs remain the mainstay of treatment for peptic ulcer disease, based on the papers we reviewed.
PubMed: 37779765
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.44341 -
Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) Sep 2023Cephalexin is a first-generation β-lactam antibiotic used in adults and pediatrics to treat various streptococcal and staphylococcal infections. This review aims to... (Review)
Review
Cephalexin is a first-generation β-lactam antibiotic used in adults and pediatrics to treat various streptococcal and staphylococcal infections. This review aims to summarize and evaluate all the pharmacokinetic (PK) data on cephalexin by screening out all pertinent studies in human beings following the per oral (PO) route. By employing different online search engines such as Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane Central, and Science Direct, 23 studies were retrieved, among which nine were in healthy subjects, five in diseased ones, and the remaining were drug-drug, drug-food, and bioequivalence-related. These studies were included only based on the presence of plasma concentration-time profiles or PK parameters, i.e., maximum plasma concentration (C), half-life (t) area under the curve from time 0-infinity (AUC and clearance (CL/F). A dose-proportional increase in AUC and C can be portrayed in different studies conducted in the healthy population. In comparison to cefaclor, C was recorded to be 0.5 folds higher for cephalexin in the case of renal impairment. An increase in AUC was seen in cephalexin on administration with probenecid, i.e., 117 µg.h/mL vs. 68.1 µg.h/mL. Moreover, drug-drug interactions with omeprazole, ranitidine, zinc sulfate, and drug-food interactions for cephalexin and other cephalosporins have also been depicted in different studies with significant changes in all PK parameters. This current review has reported all accessible studies containing PK variables in healthy and diseased populations (renal, dental, and osteoarticular infections, continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis) that may be favorable for health practitioners in optimizing doses among the latter.
PubMed: 37760698
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12091402 -
European Journal of Medical Research Aug 2023To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan-amoxicillin (VA) dual therapy for radically eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan-amoxicillin (VA) dual therapy for radically eradicating Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori).
METHODS
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang databases were searched up to July 7, 2022, to identify clinical trials comparing the efficacy of VA dual therapy and triple therapy for H. pylori eradication. After evaluating the quality of the included studies, random effects models were conducted, and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the efficacy and safety of each approach.
RESULTS
Six publications (including four randomized controlled trials) involving 2019 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, the eradication rate for VA dual therapy was 89.9%, while it was 85.2% for triple therapy based on other acid inhibitors. The eradication rate of H. pylori in the VA dual regimen group was higher than that in the PPI-based (omeprazole or lansoprazole) triple therapy group (RR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.07-1.23, p < 0.0001). However, the efficacy of VA dual therapy was comparable with VA-Clarithromycin (VAC) triple therapy (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.93-1.02). Besides, the incidence of adverse reactions in VA dual therapy was also lower than that in triple therapy (RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.91, p = 0.0009).
CONCLUSION
Compared with PPI-based triple therapy, VA dual therapy showed a better therapeutic effect, safety and patient compliance rate for eradicating H. pylori, which should be used as a novel curative strategy in the future.
Topics: Humans; Amoxicillin; Helicobacter pylori; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37550781
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01249-6 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023One-third of people with gastrointestinal disorders, including functional dyspepsia, use some form of complementary and alternative medicine, including herbal medicines. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
One-third of people with gastrointestinal disorders, including functional dyspepsia, use some form of complementary and alternative medicine, including herbal medicines.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective is to assess the effects of non-Chinese herbal medicines for the treatment of people with functional dyspepsia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases on 22 December 2022: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, among other sources, without placing language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs comparing non-Chinese herbal medicines versus placebo or other treatments in people with functional dyspepsia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened references, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias from trial reports. We used a random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs). We created effect direction plots when meta-analysis was not possible, following the reporting guideline for Synthesis without Meta-analysis (SWiM). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence (CoE) for all outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 41 trials with 4477 participants that assessed 27 herbal medicines. This review evaluated global symptoms of functional dyspepsia, adverse events and quality of life; however, some studies did not report these outcomes. STW5 (Iberogast) may moderately improve global symptoms of dyspepsia compared with placebo at 28 to 56 days; however, the evidence is very uncertain (MD -2.64, 95% CI -4.39 to -0.90; I = 87%; 5 studies, 814 participants; very low CoE). STW5 may also increase the improvement rate compared to placebo at four to eight weeks' follow-up (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.47; 2 studies, 324 participants; low CoE). There was little to no difference in adverse events for STW5 compared to placebo (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.64; I = 0%; 4 studies, 786 participants; low CoE). STW5 may cause little to no difference in quality of life compared to placebo (no numerical data available, low CoE). Peppermint and caraway oil probably result in a large improvement in global symptoms of dyspepsia compared to placebo at four weeks (SMD -0.87, 95% CI -1.15 to -0.58; I = 0%; 2 studies, 210 participants; moderate CoE) and increase the improvement rate of global symptoms of dyspepsia (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.81; I = 0%; 3 studies, 305 participants; moderate CoE). There may be little to no difference in the rate of adverse events between this intervention and placebo (RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.69 to 3.53; I = 47%; 3 studies, 305 participants; low CoE). The intervention probably improves the quality of life (measured on the Nepean Dyspepsia Index) (MD -131.40, 95% CI -193.76 to -69.04; 1 study, 99 participants; moderate CoE). Curcuma longa probably results in a moderate improvement global symptoms of dyspepsia compared to placebo at four weeks (MD -3.33, 95% CI -5.84 to -0.81; I = 50%; 2 studies, 110 participants; moderate CoE) and may increase the improvement rate (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.11; 1 study, 76 participants; low CoE). There is probably little to no difference in the rate of adverse events between this intervention and placebo (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.51 to 3.08; 1 study, 89 participants; moderate CoE). The intervention probably improves the quality of life, measured on the EQ-5D (MD 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.09; 1 study, 89 participants; moderate CoE). We found evidence that the following herbal medicines may improve symptoms of dyspepsia compared to placebo: Lafonesia pacari (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.14; 1 study, 97 participants; moderate CoE), Nigella sativa (SMD -1.59, 95% CI -2.13 to -1.05; 1 study, 70 participants; high CoE), artichoke (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.09; 1 study, 244 participants; low CoE), Boensenbergia rotunda (SMD -2.22, 95% CI -2.62 to -1.83; 1 study, 160 participants; low CoE), Pistacia lenticus (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.01; 1 study, 148 participants; low CoE), Enteroplant (SMD -1.09, 95% CI -1.40 to -0.77; 1 study, 198 participants; low CoE), Ferula asafoetida (SMD -1.51, 95% CI -2.20 to -0.83; 1 study, 43 participants; low CoE), ginger and artichoke (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.13; 1 study, 126 participants; low CoE), Glycyrrhiza glaba (SMD -1.86, 95% CI -2.54 to -1.19; 1 study, 50 participants; moderate CoE), OLNP-06 (RR 3.80, 95% CI 1.70 to 8.51; 1 study, 48 participants; low CoE), red pepper (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.89 to -0.26; 1 study, 27 participants; low CoE), Cuadrania tricuspidata (SMD -1.19, 95% CI -1.66 to -0.72; 1 study, 83 participants; low CoE), jollab (SMD -1.22, 95% CI -1.59 to -0.85; 1 study, 133 participants; low CoE), Pimpinella anisum (SMD -2.30, 95% CI -2.79 to -1.80; 1 study, 107 participants; low CoE). The following may provide little to no difference compared to placebo: Mentha pulegium (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.02; 1 study, 100 participants; moderate CoE) and cinnamon oil (SMD 0.38, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.94; 1 study, 51 participants; low CoE); moreover, Mentha longifolia may increase dyspeptic symptoms (SMD 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.88; 1 study, 88 participants; low CoE). Almost all the studies reported little to no difference in the rate of adverse events compared to placebo except for red pepper, which may result in a higher risk of adverse events compared to placebo (RR 4.31, 95% CI 1.56 to 11.89; 1 study, 27 participants; low CoE). With respect to the quality of life, most studies did not report this outcome. When compared to other interventions, essential oils may improve global symptoms of dyspepsia compared to omeprazole. Peppermint oil/caraway oil, STW5, Nigella sativa and Curcuma longa may provide little to no benefit compared to other treatments.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on moderate to very low-certainty evidence, we identified some herbal medicines that may be effective in improving symptoms of dyspepsia. Moreover, these interventions may not be associated with important adverse events. More high-quality trials are needed on herbal medicines, especially including participants with common gastrointestinal comorbidities.
Topics: Humans; Dyspepsia; Quality of Life; Plant Extracts; Complementary Therapies
PubMed: 37323050
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013323.pub2 -
Digestion 2023Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has a strong acid suppression effect and potent efficacy in acid-associated diseases, including Helicobacter... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has a strong acid suppression effect and potent efficacy in acid-associated diseases, including Helicobacter pylori eradication. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy for H. pylori eradication.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature search through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to June 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy and triple therapies for H. pylori eradication. Primary outcomes were cure rates and relative efficacy. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, dropout rate, and subgroup analysis.
RESULTS
Five studies with 1,852 patients were included in the analysis. The cure rates of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy were 85.6% with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 79.7-91.5% and 88.5% (95% CI: 83.2-93.8%) in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. The efficacy of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy was not inferior to that of triple therapy with pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.03 (95% CI: 0.97-1.10) and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.98-1.08) in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses; while it was significantly superior to the omeprazole or lansoprazole-based triple therapy (RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05-1.25, p = 0.001). For clarithromycin-resistant strains, vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy showed superiority to vonoprazan-based triple therapy (86.7% vs. 71.4%, RR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.03-1.39, p = 0.02); however, vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy was significant inferior to vonoprazan-based triple therapy for clarithromycin-sensitive strains (83.0% vs. 92.8%, RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.95, p = 0.0002). The adverse effects of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy were lower than those of triple therapy (21.2% vs. 26.5%, RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.01, p = 0.06), especially the incidence of diarrhea (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy is noninferior to vonoprazan-based triple therapy but superior to the omeprazole or lansoprazole-based triple therapy and has less side effects. Patients with clarithromycin-resistant strains are particularly expected to benefit from vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy.
Topics: Humans; Amoxicillin; Clarithromycin; Helicobacter pylori; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Pyrroles; Lansoprazole; Omeprazole; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37015201
DOI: 10.1159/000529622 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are usually prescribed to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) complications in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This...
Efficacy and safety of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors with aspirin-clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are usually prescribed to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) complications in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of the concomitant use of PPIs with aspirin-clopidogrel DAPT in patients with Coronary heart disease (CHD). The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to August 2022 for eligible studies. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate the clinical outcomes. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to different PPI subtypes, populations, follow-up times and study types. This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022332195). A total of 173,508 patients from 18 studies [2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 3 analyses of RCTs, and 13 cohort studies] were included in this study. Pooled data revealed that coadministration of PPIs significantly increased the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.06-1.26, = .001) and reduced the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) complications (HR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.30-0.64, .0001). Subgroup analysis results showed that the esomeprazole users and patients with coronary stenting in the PPI group were associated with an increased risk of MACEs compared with the non-PPI group. The occurrence of MACEs in PPI users was more common than that in non-PPI users in long-term follow-up (≥12 months) studies and in the observational studies. There was no significant differences in the incidences of net clinical adverse events (NACEs), all-cause mortality, or cardiac death between the two groups. In patients with CHD, the concomitant use of PPIs with aspirin and clopidogrel was associated with a reduced risk of GI complications but could increase the rates of MACEs (particularly in patients receiving esomeprazole or with coronary stenting). There was no clear evidence of an association between PPI use and NACEs, all-cause mortality, or cardiac death. The results could have been affected by the follow-up time and study type. Further large-scale RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed.
PubMed: 36703730
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.1021584 -
Medicine Nov 2022Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and vonoprazan are recommended as first-line therapies for erosive esophagitis (EE). However, it is uncertain how the magnitude of efficacy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and vonoprazan are recommended as first-line therapies for erosive esophagitis (EE). However, it is uncertain how the magnitude of efficacy and safety of first-line therapy, the choice of individual PPIs or vonoprazan in the treatment of EE remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan and PPIs in healing esophageal mucosal injury in patients with EE.
METHODS
Relevant databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials of proton pump inhibitors and vonoprazan in the treatment of reflux esophagitis up to December 2021. Studies on standard-dose PPIs or vonoprazan that were published in Chinese or English and assessed healing effects in EE were included in the analysis. Stata16.0 was used to conduct a network Meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the treatment.
RESULTS
A total of 41 literatures were included with 11,592 enrolled patients. For the endoscopic cure rate, all the PPIs and vonoprazan significantly improve compared to Placebo; Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, Ilaprazole ranked first, followed by esomeprazole, vonoprazan, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole and placebo therapy ranked the last. For the rate of adverse events, there was no significant difference among all the PPIs, vonoprazan, and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
Ilaprazole, esomeprazole and vonoprazan have more advantages in mucosal erosion healing, there was no significant difference in the comparative safety among all interventions.
Topics: Humans; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Esomeprazole; Network Meta-Analysis; Peptic Ulcer; Rabeprazole; Esophagitis, Peptic; Abdominal Injuries
PubMed: 36451489
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000031807 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022The cure rates of () treatment using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) are gradually decreasing due to antibiotic resistance, poor compliance, high gastric acidity, and...
The cure rates of () treatment using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) are gradually decreasing due to antibiotic resistance, poor compliance, high gastric acidity, and cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) polymorphism, and the effects of PPI depend on metabolic enzymes, cytochrome P450 enzymes. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine whether CYP2C19 polymorphisms affect cure rates in patients treated with different proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) according to stratified analysis. The literature was searched with the key words "" and "CYP2C19" in PubMed, CNKI, and Wanfang up to 31 May 2022, and the studies were limited to clinical observational or randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Finally, seven RCTs and 29 clinical observational studies met the inclusion criteria and were used for the meta-analysis STATA version 16. The cure rates were significantly different between genotypes of homozygous extensive metabolizers (EM) and poor metabolizers (PM) (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.47-0.71) and between EM and heterozygous extensive metabolizers (IM) (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59-0.86), but not between IM and PM. Moreover, there was a significantly lower cure rate in EM subjects than that in IM subjects when treated with omeprazole (66.4% vs. 84.1%), lansoprazole (76.1% vs. 85.6%), but not rabeprazole, esomeprazole, or pantoprazole. In addition, there was a significantly lower cure rate in EM subjects than that in IM subjects when treated with a PPIs for 7 days (77.4% vs. 82.1%), but not 14 days (85.4% vs. 90.0%). Carriers of CYP2C19 loss-of-function variant alleles (IM and PM) exhibit a significantly greater cure rate of than noncarriers (EM) regardless of other factors (84.7% vs. 79.2%). In addition, pantoprazole- and rabeprazole-based quadruple therapy for treatment is less dependent on the CYP2C19 genotype and should be prioritized in Asian populations with .
PubMed: 36278195
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.938419 -
Neurogastroenterology and Motility Jan 2023The comparative efficacy and safety of medical therapies for gastro-esophageal reflux symptoms in endoscopy-negative reflux disease is unclear. We conducted a network... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The comparative efficacy and safety of medical therapies for gastro-esophageal reflux symptoms in endoscopy-negative reflux disease is unclear. We conducted a network meta-analysis to evaluate efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine-2-receptor antagonists, potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs), and alginates in patients with endoscopy-negative reflux disease.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMBASE Classic, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials from inception to February 1, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy of all drugs versus each other, or versus a placebo, in adults with endoscopy-negative reflux disease. Results were reported as pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals to summarize effect of each comparison tested, with treatments ranked according to P-score.
KEY RESULTS
We identified 23 RCTs containing 10,735 subjects with endoscopy-negative reflux disease. Based on failure to achieve complete relief of symptoms between ≥2 and <4 weeks, omeprazole 20 mg o.d. (P-score 0.94) ranked first, with esomeprazole 20 mg o.d. or 40 mg o.d. ranked second and third. In achieving adequate relief, only rabeprazole 10 mg o.d. was significantly more efficacious than placebo. For failure to achieve complete relief at ≥4 weeks, dexlansoprazole 30 mg o.d. (P-score 0.95) ranked first, with 30 ml alginate q.i.d. combined with omeprazole 20 mg o.d., and 30 ml alginate t.i.d. second and third. In terms of failure to achieve adequate relief at ≥4 weeks, dexlansoprazole 60 mg o.d. ranked first (P-score 0.90), with dexlansoprazole 30 mg o.d. and rabeprazole 20 mg o.d. second and third. All drugs were safe and well-tolerated.
CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES
Our results confirm superiority of PPIs compared with most other drugs in treating endoscopy-negative reflux disease. Future RCTs should aim to better classify patients with endoscopy-negative reflux disease, and to establish the role of alginates and PCABs in achieving symptom relief in both the short- and long-term.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Gastrointestinal Agents; Rabeprazole; Dexlansoprazole; Heartburn; Network Meta-Analysis; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Omeprazole; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Alginates; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36153790
DOI: 10.1111/nmo.14469