Kang Seung Joo, Jung Hye-Kyung, Tae Chung Hyun, Kim Seung Young, Lee Kwang Jae
Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital Gangnam Center, Seoul, Korea.
Department of Internal Medicine, Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2022 Jan 30;28(1):5-14. doi: 10.5056/jnm21095.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Long-term maintenance treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is commonly used to prevent relapse of reflux symptoms; however, due to concerns about safety of long-term proton pump inhibitors (PPI) use, on-demand therapy is recommended as a longterm treatment modality. We compared the efficacy of on-demand and continuous PPI therapy for maintenance treatment of patients with GERD using meta-analysis. METHODS: Core electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing on-demand and continuous therapy in GERD patients. The primary outcome was treatment failure of maintenance therapy, and the secondary outcomes included symptomatic relief, patient satisfaction, and amount of PPI use. RESULTS: Overall, 11 studies were selected in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Compared with continuous PPI therapy, on-demand therapy showed similar outcomes for treatment failure (risk ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-2.07), particularly in the non-erosive esophageal reflux disease and mild erosive reflux disease group (risk ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.39-5.63). In studies including severe esophagitis patients, continuous PPI maintenance treatment was more effective (β, 0.127 [95% CI, 0.066-0.188]; < 0.001). Severity of esophagitis was associated with higher efficacies of continuous maintenance therapy. The amount of daily PPI use was about half in the on-demand group compared to the continuous group (risk difference -0.52; 95% CI, -0.62--0.42). CONCLUSIONS: On-demand PPI therapy shows comparable efficacy to the continuous maintenance treatment in the non-erosive esophageal reflux disease and mild erosive reflux disease group, and can remarkably reduce the amount of PPI use. Therefore, on-demand therapy may be preferentially recommended in the maintenance treatment of GERD unaccompanied by severe esophagitis.
背景/目的:胃食管反流病(GERD)的长期维持治疗常用于预防反流症状复发;然而,由于对长期使用质子泵抑制剂(PPI)安全性的担忧,按需治疗被推荐为一种长期治疗方式。我们通过荟萃分析比较了按需和持续PPI治疗对GERD患者维持治疗的疗效。 方法:检索核心电子数据库,查找比较GERD患者按需治疗和持续治疗的随机对照试验。主要结局是维持治疗的失败,次要结局包括症状缓解、患者满意度和PPI使用量。 结果:总体而言,在系统评价和荟萃分析中选择了11项研究。与持续PPI治疗相比,按需治疗在治疗失败方面显示出相似的结果(风险比,1.26;95%置信区间[CI],0.76 - 2.07),特别是在非糜烂性食管反流病和轻度糜烂性反流病组(风险比,1.48;95%CI,0.39 - 5.63)。在包括严重食管炎患者的研究中,持续PPI维持治疗更有效(β,0.127[95%CI,0.066 - 0.188];P < 0.001)。食管炎的严重程度与持续维持治疗的更高疗效相关。按需治疗组的每日PPI使用量约为持续治疗组的一半(风险差 -0.52;95%CI,-0.62 - -0.42)。 结论:在非糜烂性食管反流病和轻度糜烂性反流病组中,按需PPI治疗显示出与持续维持治疗相当的疗效,并且可以显著减少PPI的使用量。因此,在无严重食管炎的GERD维持治疗中,按需治疗可能更值得推荐。
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007-7-15
J Gastroenterol. 2016-8
Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol. 2008-2
Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y). 2024-8
Indian J Gastroenterol. 2023-10
JAMA. 2020-12-22
Int J Qual Health Care. 2020-6-17
Cancer Epidemiol. 2019-8-21
Pharmacotherapy. 2019-3-21
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-3-16