Tavakoli M, Prach A T, Malek M, Hopwood D, Senior B W, Murray F E
Department of Management, University of St Andrews, Scotland.
Pharmacoeconomics. 1999 Oct;16(4):355-65. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199916040-00004.
Much has been published on the efficacy and cost effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment as an alternative to histamine H2-receptor antagonist maintenance treatment in peptic ulcer disease. However, most studies have analysed and emphasised H. pylori eradication rates rather than management/control of symptoms and the associated cost savings. Although H. pylori eradication therapy is very successful in clearing the infection, dyspeptic symptoms may persist and management of these can be expensive.
The aim of this study was to assess the cost implications in controlling symptoms using either H2-receptor antagonist maintenance therapy or H. pylori eradication therapy in patients with duodenal ulcer disease.
This was a non-blind, prospective, randomised, parallel-group study comparing maintenance H2-receptor antagonist treatment using ranitidine with H. pylori eradication therapy, with a 1-year follow-up.
This was a study of outpatients from general practices in Dundee, Scotland, or the Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, gastroenterology clinic.
119 patients with confirmed duodenal ulcer, free from active ulceration at study entry but positive for H. pylori infection, who were receiving maintenance H2-receptor antagonist therapy.
Patients were randomised to receive either continuing maintenance therapy with ranitidine (initially 150 mg daily; 58 patients) or H. pylori eradication therapy using an omeprazole/amoxicillin/metronidazole regimen (or omeprazole/clarithromycin if allergic to penicillin).
Overall, H. pylori eradication rates were 100% per protocol and 95.1% intention-to-treat. At completion of 1 year of follow-up, 12 of the 61 (19.7%) patients successfully eradicated of H. pylori were still dependent on acid suppression for symptom relief. H. pylori eradication treatment was the least-cost strategy in managing/controlling symptoms at 1 year (168 Pounds vs 210 Pounds per patient; 1996 values). However, over time, post-eradication treatment costs were greater than H2-receptor antagonist therapy costs. Any potential savings were directly related to the proportion of patients needing further treatment post-eradication, the cost of endoscopy and the urea breath test.
If dyspepsia persists long term, H. pylori eradication treatment may not be the least-cost option for patients with duodenal ulcer.
关于幽门螺杆菌根除治疗作为消化性溃疡疾病中组胺H2受体拮抗剂维持治疗替代方案的疗效和成本效益,已有大量文献发表。然而,大多数研究分析并强调了幽门螺杆菌的根除率,而非症状的管理/控制及相关成本节约。尽管幽门螺杆菌根除疗法在清除感染方面非常成功,但消化不良症状可能持续存在,而对这些症状的管理可能成本高昂。
本研究的目的是评估在十二指肠溃疡疾病患者中使用H2受体拮抗剂维持治疗或幽门螺杆菌根除治疗控制症状的成本影响。
这是一项非盲、前瞻性、随机、平行组研究,比较使用雷尼替丁的H2受体拮抗剂维持治疗与幽门螺杆菌根除治疗,并进行1年随访。
这是一项针对苏格兰邓迪普通诊所或邓迪九井医院胃肠病学诊所门诊患者的研究。
119例确诊为十二指肠溃疡的患者,研究开始时无活动性溃疡,但幽门螺杆菌感染呈阳性,正在接受H2受体拮抗剂维持治疗。
患者被随机分配接受雷尼替丁持续维持治疗(初始剂量为每日150毫克;58例患者)或使用奥美拉唑/阿莫西林/甲硝唑方案(若对青霉素过敏则使用奥美拉唑/克拉霉素)的幽门螺杆菌根除治疗。
总体而言,按方案分析幽门螺杆菌根除率为100%,意向性分析为95.1%。在随访1年结束时,61例成功根除幽门螺杆菌的患者中有12例(19.7%)仍依赖抑酸来缓解症状。幽门螺杆菌根除治疗是1年时管理/控制症状的成本最低策略(每位患者168英镑对210英镑;1996年价值)。然而,随着时间推移,根除治疗后的成本高于H2受体拮抗剂治疗成本。任何潜在的成本节约都直接与根除后需要进一步治疗的患者比例、内镜检查成本和尿素呼气试验成本相关。
如果消化不良症状长期持续,对于十二指肠溃疡患者,幽门螺杆菌根除治疗可能不是成本最低的选择。