Veldhuyzen van Zanten Sander J O, Chiba Naoki, Armstrong David, Barkun Alan, Thomson Alan, Smyth Sandra, Escobedo Sergio, Lee Joanna, Sinclair Paul
Division of Gastroenterology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2005 Jul;100(7):1477-88. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.40280.x.
The management of Helicobacter pylori negative patients with dyspepsia in primary care has not been studied in placebo-controlled studies.
H. pylori negative patients with dyspepsia symptoms of at least moderate severity (> or =4 on a seven-point Likert scale) were recruited from 35 centers. Patients were randomized to a 4-wk treatment of omeprazole 20 mg od, ranitidine 150 mg bid, cisapride 20 mg bid, or placebo, followed by on-demand therapy for an additional 5 months. Treatment success was defined as no or minimal symptoms (score < or = 2 out of 7), and was assessed after 4 wk and at 6 months.
Five hundred and twelve patients were randomized and included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. At 4 wk, success rates (95% CI) were: omeprazole 51% (69/135; 43-60%), ranitidine 36% (50/139, 28-44%), cisapride 31% (32/105, 22-39%), and placebo 23% (31/133, 16-31%). Omeprazole was significantly better than all other treatments (p < 0.05). The proportion of patients who were responders at 4 wk and at 6 months was significantly greater for those receiving omeprazole 31% (42/135, 23-39%) compared with cisapride 13% (14/105, 7-20%), and placebo 14% (18/133, 8-20%) (p= 0.001), but not ranitidine 21% (29/139, 14-27%) (p= 0.053). The mean number of on-demand study tablets consumed and rescue antacid used was comparable across groups. Economic analysis showed a trade-off between superior efficacy and increased cost between omeprazole and ranitidine.
Treatment with omeprazole provides superior symptom relief compared to ranitidine, cisapride, and placebo in the treatment of H. pylori negative primary care dyspepsia patients.
在初级保健中,针对幽门螺杆菌阴性的消化不良患者的管理尚未在安慰剂对照研究中得到研究。
从35个中心招募了幽门螺杆菌阴性且消化不良症状至少为中度严重程度(在七点李克特量表上≥4分)的患者。患者被随机分配接受为期4周的治疗,治疗药物分别为:奥美拉唑20毫克每日一次、雷尼替丁150毫克每日两次、西沙必利20毫克每日两次或安慰剂,随后进行为期5个月的按需治疗。治疗成功定义为无或仅有轻微症状(评分≤2分(满分7分)),并在4周和6个月后进行评估。
512名患者被随机分组并纳入意向性治疗(ITT)分析。在4周时,成功率(95%置信区间)分别为:奥美拉唑51%(69/135;43 - 60%)、雷尼替丁36%(50/139,28 - 44%)、西沙必利31%(32/105,22 - 39%)和安慰剂23%(31/133,16 - 31%)。奥美拉唑明显优于所有其他治疗方法(p < 0.05)。与接受西沙必利治疗的患者13%(14/105,7 - 20%)和接受安慰剂治疗的患者14%(18/133,8 - 20%)相比,接受奥美拉唑治疗的患者在4周和6个月时出现反应的比例明显更高(31%(42/135,23 - 39%))(p = 0.001),但与接受雷尼替丁治疗的患者21%(29/139,14 - 27%)相比无显著差异(p = 0.053)。各组按需服用的研究药物片数和使用的急救抗酸剂数量均值相当。经济分析表明,奥美拉唑和雷尼替丁在疗效优势和成本增加之间存在权衡。
在治疗幽门螺杆菌阴性的初级保健消化不良患者方面,与雷尼替丁、西沙必利和安慰剂相比,奥美拉唑治疗能更有效地缓解症状。