Division of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina; Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Division of Gastroenterology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut.
Gastroenterology. 2024 Nov;167(6):1228-1238. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2024.06.038. Epub 2024 Sep 11.
DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update (CPU) is to summarize the available evidence and offer expert Best Practice Advice on the integration of potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) in the clinical management of foregut disorders, specifically including gastroesophageal reflux disease, Helicobacter pylori infection, and peptic ulcer disease. METHODS: This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Governing Board and CPU Committee to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership. This CPU expert review underwent internal peer review by the CPU Committee and external peer review through the standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These Best Practice Advice statements were developed based on review of the published literature and expert consensus opinion. Because formal systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings of the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Based on nonclinical factors (including cost, greater obstacles to obtaining medication, and fewer long-term safety data), clinicians should generally not use P-CABs as initial therapy for acid-related conditions in which clinical superiority has not been shown. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Based on current costs in the United States, even modest clinical superiority of P-CABs over double-dose proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may not make P-CABs cost-effective as first-line therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Clinicians should generally not use P-CABs as first-line therapy for patients with uninvestigated heartburn symptoms or nonerosive reflux disease. Clinicians may use P-CABs in selected patients with documented acid-related reflux who fail therapy with twice-daily PPIs. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Although there is currently insufficient evidence for clinicians to use P-CABs as first-line on-demand therapy for patients with heartburn symptoms who have previously responded to antisecretory therapy, their rapid onset of acid inhibition raises the possibility of their utility in this population. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Clinicians should generally not use P-CABs as first-line therapy in patients with milder erosive esophagitis (EE) (Los Angeles classification of erosive esophagitis grade A/B EE). Clinicians may use P-CABs in selected patients with documented acid-related reflux who fail therapy with twice-daily PPIs. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Clinicians may use P-CABs as a therapeutic option for the healing and maintenance of healing in patients with more severe EE (Los Angeles classification of erosive esophagitis grade C/D EE). However, given the markedly higher costs of the P-CAB presently available in the United States and the lack of randomized comparisons with double-dose PPIs, it is not clear that the benefits in endoscopic outcomes over standard-dose PPIs justify the routine use of P-CABs as first-line therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Clinicians should use P-CABs in place of PPIs in eradication regimens for most patients with H pylori infection. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Clinicians should generally not use P-CABs as first-line therapy in the treatment or prophylaxis of peptic ulcer disease. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Although there is currently insufficient evidence for clinicians to use P-CABs as first-line therapy in patients with bleeding gastroduodenal ulcers and high-risk stigmata, their rapid and potent acid inhibition raises the possibility of their utility in this population.
描述:本美国胃肠病学会(AGA)协会临床实践更新(CPU)的目的是总结现有的证据,并就竞争性酸阻滞剂(P-CAB)在治疗前肠疾病方面的整合提供专家最佳实践建议,特别是包括胃食管反流病、幽门螺杆菌感染和消化性溃疡病。
方法:本专家综述由 AGA 协会理事会和 CPU 委员会委托和批准,旨在为 AGA 成员高度重视的临床重要主题提供及时的指导。本 CPU 专家综述经过 CPU 委员会内部同行评审和通过《胃肠病学》标准程序的外部同行评审。这些最佳实践建议是基于对已发表文献和专家共识意见的审查而制定的。由于没有进行正式的系统评价,因此这些最佳实践建议不具有证据质量或提出考虑因素的强度的正式评级。最佳实践建议 1:基于非临床因素(包括成本、获得药物的更大障碍和较少的长期安全性数据),临床医生通常不应将 P-CAB 作为酸相关疾病的初始治疗,除非已证明其具有临床优势。最佳实践建议 2:根据美国目前的成本,即使 P-CAB 对双倍剂量质子泵抑制剂(PPIs)具有适度的临床优势,也不一定使 P-CAB 成为一线治疗的经济型选择。最佳实践建议 3:对于未经调查的烧心症状或非糜烂性反流病患者,临床医生通常不应将 P-CAB 作为一线治疗。对于接受每日两次 PPI 治疗失败的有记录的酸相关反流患者,临床医生可以在选定的患者中使用 P-CAB。最佳实践建议 4:尽管目前尚无足够的证据让临床医生将 P-CAB 作为烧心症状患者按需一线治疗的药物,这些药物能迅速抑制胃酸分泌,这提高了它们在这一人群中的应用可能性。最佳实践建议 5:对于轻度糜烂性食管炎(洛杉矶分类为糜烂性食管炎 A/B 级 EE)患者,临床医生通常不应将 P-CAB 作为一线治疗。对于接受每日两次 PPI 治疗失败的有记录的酸相关反流患者,临床医生可以在选定的患者中使用 P-CAB。最佳实践建议 6:对于更严重的 EE(洛杉矶分类为糜烂性食管炎 C/D 级 EE)患者,临床医生可以将 P-CAB 作为治疗和维持愈合的治疗选择。然而,鉴于目前在美国可用的 P-CAB 的成本明显更高,且缺乏与双倍剂量 PPI 的随机比较,尚不清楚内镜治疗结果的益处是否超过标准剂量 PPI,从而证明 P-CAB 作为一线治疗的常规使用是合理的。最佳实践建议 7:对于大多数幽门螺杆菌感染患者,临床医生应使用 P-CAB 代替 PPI 进行根除治疗方案。最佳实践建议 8:对于消化性溃疡病的治疗或预防,临床医生通常不应将 P-CAB 作为一线治疗。最佳实践建议 9:虽然目前尚无足够的证据让临床医生将 P-CAB 作为有出血性胃十二指肠溃疡和高危征象的患者的一线治疗,但它们能迅速而有效地抑制胃酸分泌,这提高了它们在这一人群中的应用可能性。
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023-6
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022-5
Gastroenterology. 2022-4
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024-5
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024-12
Gastroenterology. 2024-10
Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2024-11
Gut Liver. 2025-7-15
J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2025-7-30
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2025-5
Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2025-2-25
Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y). 2025-1