Short-term Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effect of Acid-suppressant Drugs in Empirical Treatment and in Endoscopy-negative Patients

Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 AB Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Journal of General Internal Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.28). 01/2003; 18(9). DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20833.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of acid suppressant drugs in the empirical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and in the treatment of endoscopy-negative reflux disease (ENRD). DESIGN: medline, embase,and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched. Bibliographies were reviewed. SETTING: Studies were eligible that compared the short-term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) with each other or with placebo in adults with GERD who were enrolled irrespective of endoscopic findings (empirical cases) or in whom endoscopy showed no signs of esophagitis (endoscopy-negative cases). MEASUREMENTS: Of 1,408 studies, only 13 could be included for meta-analysis. Data on 3,433 patients empirically treated for GERD and 2,520 patients treated for ENRD were extracted. The primary endpoint was relief of heartburn. MAIN RESULTS: In the empirical treatment of GERD, the summary relative risk (sRR) for symptom relief from H2RAs versus placebo was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.60 to 0.99). RR in the only placebo-controlled PPI trial was 0.35 (95% CI, 0.26 to 0.46). The sRR for standard dose PPIs versus H2RAs was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.44 to 0.68). In treatment of ENRD, both PPIs (sRR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.79) and H2RAs (sRR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.97) were superior to placebo, and PPIs were superior to H2RAs (sRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Acid suppressant therapy (with a PPI or an H2RA) is more effective than placebo for short-term relief of heartburn in patients with persistent symptoms who are treated empirically for GERD and in those in whom esophagitis was excluded after endoscopy. The benefit of PPIs compared with H2RAs is more pronounced in patients treated empirically.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are well established as first-line agents for the treatment of moderate-to-severe gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). Although all PPIs heal oesophageal lesions and provide symptomatic relief, breakthrough symptoms may occur as acidity levels rebound. Pantoprazole magnesium (pantoprazole-Mg) has a longer elimination half-life than pantoprazole sodium (pantoprazole-Na), resulting in prolonged drug exposure. This study compares the clinical efficacy and safety of once-daily pantoprazole-Mg 40 mg with that of once-daily pantoprazole-Na 40 mg in the management of GORD. This was a randomized, double-blind, controlled, multicentre study of non-inferiority design in outpatients with GORD. The study was conducted in 53 centres in Germany from 12 May 2003 to 18 September 2003. Male or female outpatients (aged ≥18 years) with endoscopically confirmed GORD stage I-III (according to the Savary-Miller classification modified by Siewert) were enrolled. Using a computer-generated randomization list, patients were randomized to treatment with pantoprazole-Mg 40 mg plus placebo or pantoprazole-Na 40 mg plus placebo, both given once daily for 4 or 8 weeks depending on healing of oesophagitis. The primary objective was endoscopic healing at 8 weeks. The intent-to-treat (ITT) group consisted of 636 patients (322 receiving pantoprazole-Mg and 314 receiving pantoprazole-Na). Endoscopically confirmed healing of reflux oesophagitis after 8 weeks occurred in 87.3% (95% CI 83.1, 90.7) of patients receiving pantoprazole-Mg and 85.0% (95% CI 80.6, 88.8) of patients receiving pantoprazole-Na (ITT population). The lower bound of the 95% CI for the between-group treatment difference was -1.3, which was within the predefined margin of non-inferiority of -10% to 0%. Healing rates after 4 weeks were superior in the pantoprazole-Mg group (72.7% [95% CI 67.5, 77.5]) compared with the pantoprazole-Na group (66.2% [95% CI 60.7, 71.5]), and the one-sided (lower bound) of the 95% CI for the difference between healing rates for the two treatments was within the predefined non-inferiority margin of -10% to 0%. Both treatments had a similar effect on GORD healing in subgroups of patients based on baseline oesophagitis grade and Helicobacter pylori status. Pantoprazole-Mg had similar efficacy to pantoprazole-Na in relieving a broad range of GORD-related symptoms across the course of the study, although symptomatic relief at 4 weeks was numerically higher in the pantoprazole-Mg group than in the pantoprazole-Na group (statistical analyses were not performed). Both treatments were well tolerated; most adverse events were of mild or moderate severity and unrelated to the study medication, and there were no unexpected safety concerns. Pantoprazole-Mg is clinically as effective and well tolerated as pantoprazole-Na in the treatment of GORD stages I-III, demonstrating non-inferiority for oesophageal healing at 8 weeks and superior healing rates at 4 weeks associated with high levels of symptomatic relief.
    Clinical Drug Investigation 09/2011; 31(9):655-64. · 1.70 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bulimia nervosa, often characterized by self-induced vomiting, is complicated by medical manifestations that affect nearly every organ system in the body. Effects range from superficial skin and dental findings to esophageal pathology, electrolyte abnormalities, cardiac arrhythmias, and in extreme cases, death. Ultimately, cessation of vomiting is necessary to cure most associated medical complications. Improper management of medical complications may lead to significant psychological distress to the patient. Fortunately, efficacious treatments do exist both to ease symptoms and ideally help the patient make a smooth transition to cessation of self-induced vomiting behavior.
    Eating disorders 01/2013; 21(4):287-94.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a diagnosis applicable to "all individuals who are exposed to the risk of physical complications from gastroesophageal reflux, or who experience clinically significant impairment of health related well being (quality of life) due to reflux related symptoms, after adequate reassurance of the benign nature of their symptoms". It remains, predominantly, a symptom-based diagnosis, confirmed clinically by a response to acid suppression therapy although it is accompanied by demonstrable increases in acid exposure on esophageal pH-metry and by endoscopic and histological changes. Standard white light endoscopy permits diagnosis of erosive reflux disease (ERD) which, if present, should be graded for severity using the Los Angeles classification system. However, the role of endoscopy in clinical practice is, primarily, to evaluate patients with persistent symptoms, despite medical therapy, or to investigate alarm features and exclude complications such as Barrett' oesophagus which should be assessed using the Prague C & M criteria. Newer endoscopic techniques allow detection of 'minimal change' GERD lesions and Barrett's oesophagus-associated dysplastic or neoplastic lesions; however, none of the newer techniques has been validated for routine clinical practice. There is an increasing recognition that histology in GERD may provide useful diagnostic information, in part to exclude other lesions, such as eosinophilic oesophagitis, intestinal metaplasia and dysplasia or malignancy and, in part, to identify changes, such as basal cell hyperplasia, papillary elongation and, most recently, dilated intercellular spaces, that are consistent with GERD. However, more widespread incorporation of histology into the clinical management of GERD will require a standardized biopsy protocol and efforts to minimise interobserver differences in the identification of GERD-related histological changes.
    Best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology 06/2013; 27(3):373-85. · 2.48 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 16, 2014