Library

Notes: Virtually all duodenal ulcers (DUs) and the vast majority of gastric ulcers (GUS) are the consequence of Helicobacter pylori-associated inflammation. In DUs, the inflammation is maximal in the antrum and is associated with gastric metaplasia in the bulb. Gastrin homeostasis is disturbed by H. pylori gastritis and there is robust acid secretion. Successful eradication of the infection cures the ulcer diathesis. Amalgamated figures for ulcer relapse per year in H. pylori-positive DUs are 〉 60% compared with 2.6% for H. pylori-negative DU patients. The corresponding figures for GU are 〉 50% for H. pylori-positive and 2.0% for H. pylori-negative individuals. This striking difference in relapse rate persists, as the re-infection rate in the developed world is 〈 1 % per year. Recurrent bleeding in bleeding-prone DUs is essentially abolished after cure of the infection.Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are increasingly used in eradication regimens. PPIs have intrinsic antimicrobial activity. MICs for lansoprazole (LAN) are lower than for omeprazole (OME). Two weeks of triple therapy (bismuth, tetracycline, imidazole) has, on average, a superior eradication efficacy (± 90%) compared with dual therapy (PPI, amoxycillin or clarithromycin) (± 80%). When a combination of PPI and two antibiotics has been used, results comparable to triple therapy have been reported. However, the side-effects profile and patient acceptability of PPI plus one or two antibiotic regimens are better than for traditional triple therapy. To date, published results with LAN-antibiotic combinations are limited, but may be expected to be comparable to those obtained with OME combinations.

Notes: Aim: To determine whether 4 days of quadruple therapy using bismuth, tetracycline and metronidazole combined with omeprazole is effective treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection. Methods. Non-ulcer dyspepsia, as well as chronic peptic ulcer patients with biopsy-proven H. pylori infection received 4 days of quadruple therapy. They were pre-treated with 3 days of omeprazole. At least 5–6 weeks later, endoscopy was repeated with 10 biopsies for urease test, histology and culture to establish cure of infection. Results: None of the 54 patients included was lost to follow-up but two had a 14C-urea breath test instead of endoscopy. Side-effects did not interfere with compliance. Forty-nine out of 54 patients (91 %; 95% Cl: 80–97 %) were cured. Metronidazole susceptibility data were available from 43 pre-treatment isolates. Of these 38/40 (95 %) with a metronidazole-sensitive strain, and one of three with a metronidazole-resistant strain were cured. Conclusions: Four days of quadruple therapy after omeprazole pre-treatment is a feasible, well tolerated, and effective treatment for N. pylori infection, especially in those carrying a metronidazole-sensitive strain. It seems that in quadruple therapy, cure rate and treatment duration have a non-linear relation. Our results need confirmation, but for patients suffering from side-effects with the 7-day regimen stopping treatment after 4 days is justified.

Notes: Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is a common disorder and symptoms can be mild to severe. Management of the disease should be individualized. Life-style changes are important for all patients. Drug therapy is often necessary but only very few patients with severe disease need surgical treatment. The purpose of this article is to focus on drug therapy and to review the clinical trials of all the drugs used for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Thereafter, judged solely on the data derived from these trials, a practical approach to the management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is suggested.

Notes: Background: Cure rates of H. pylori infection, using dual therapy with omeprazole and amoxycillin, vary considerably and the efficacy of retreatment with this regimen in the case of initial failure is controversial. Therefore, we conducted a large prospective double-blind randomized trial, studying the efficacy of low vs. high dose omeprazole in dual therapy and of early retreatment with the same regimens. Methods: One hundred and sixty-eight consecutive H. pylori-positive patients, suffering from either peptic ulcer disease or functional dyspepsia, were enrolled. Group I (n=84) received omeprazole 20 mg b.d. plus amoxycillin 750 mg t.d.s., for 2 weeks. Group II (n=84) received omeprazole 40 mg t.d.s. plus amoxicillin 750 mg t.d.s., for 2 weeks. Results: The H. pylori eradication rate was 60.2% in group I and 64.3% in group II (P=0.59). Cure of H. pylori infection was significantly better in patients with peptic ulcer disease, compared to non-ulcer dyspeptics (P=0.016). Retreatment, given in 54 patients, was successful in 21.4% patients in group I and in 28% patients in group II (P=0.58). Conclusions: High dose of omeprazole has no advantage compared to low dose in terms of eradication efficacy. Early retreatment with the same regimen offers limited improvement in cure rate. Presence of peptic ulcer disease influences cure rates significantly.

Notes: Background : The presence of the gastric pathogen, Helicobacter pylori influences acid suppression by proton pump inhibitors and treatment outcome in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.Aim : To determine the influence of H. pylori infection on effectiveness of rabeprazole in primary and secondary care patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.Methods : Patients from primary and secondary care centres with uninvestigated gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (based on symptoms only) and investigated gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (endoscopically confirmed oesophagitis or endoscopy-negative reflux disease) were tested for H. pylori and treated with rabeprazole 20 mg once daily for 4–8 weeks in a non-randomized, multicentre, open-label study. Primary end-point for treatment effectiveness was complete resolution of both heartburn and acid regurgitation at 4–8 weeks; secondary end-point was quality of life as registered with the Psychological General Well-being Index.Results : Data of 1787 patients could be analysed; mean duration of treatment was 36.3 days. At the evaluation visit 76.9% were heartburn-free, 77.7% regurgitation-free and 71% had complete symptom resolution. Overall Psychological General Well-being Index scores improved accordingly. Treatment was equally effective in patients with or without H. pylori infection, but more effective in patients with oesophagitis when compared with symptomatic gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.Conclusions : The effectiveness of rabeprazole in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is not affected by the presence of H. pylori infection.

Notes: Antimicrobial treatment of Helicobacter pylori is the proper management strategy in patients with ulcers. A high rate of H. pylori reinfection after successful eradication therapy however, may give rise to ulcer recurrence. The risk of reinfection, depending on the prevalence and the rate of acquisition of H. pylori infection, varies with socioeconomic status, age and geographical location. The rate of reinfection may vary in a similar way. The available data in the literature reveal that reinfection by H. pylori is low or absent in developed countries and may be lower than the initial rate of acquisition. In addition, reported cases of H. pylori reinfection are often cases of recrudescent H. pylori infection. Acquisition rate in developing countries is high, so the reinfection rate is expected to be higher than in developed countries. However, studies discriminating reinfection from recrudescence are lacking and therefore more data from developing regions are needed to settle if ‘cured once, cured forever’ holds true.

Notes: There is an explosion of interest in the role of Campylobacter pylori as a cause of active chronic gastritis. This curved spiraled microorganism can readily be detected within the mucus gel covering the stomach mucosa, especially in patients suffering from peptic ulcer disease or non-ulcer dyspepsia. To what extent this intriguing microorganism is causally related to peptic ulcer disease remains to be elucidated, but all the evidence which is available so far supports a pathogenetically important role. There appears to be a striking discordance between in-vitro sensitivity and in-vivo efficacy of antibiotic therapy. At present, the combination of colloidal bismuth subcitrate and amoxycillin or tinidazole appears most effective in temporary elimination of these microorganisms.

Notes: Treatment of endosocopy-negative gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (s-GERD) should be directed towards rapid relief of symptoms and then maintenance of relief using minimum yet effective therapy. Responses to proton pump inhibitors are somewhat lower in s-GERD patients compared to GERD with overt erosive damage (e-GERD). The reasons for a lower response rate are not clear but may relate to the inclusion of patients who do not have reflux disease or patients with a lower oesophageal sensory threshold. Also poorly understood is the lower yield of complete heartburn relief when the number of associated dyspeptic symptoms is high. Some form of long-term therapy is needed in the majority of patients. ‘On demand’ proton pump inhibitor therapy to control reflux symptoms is a new and attractive option. Time to study discontinuation due to insufficient control of heartburn, or any other reason resulting in unwillingness to continue with on-demand therapy, is a pragmatic outcome that is well suited to definition of the efficacy of on-demand therapy. The goals of treatment of e-GERD should be to relieve symptoms and to heal lesions. Symptom severity and much less endoscopic abnormalities drives the therapeutic choices. When symptoms are mild or intermittent and when oesophagitis is of limited degree, standard dose proton pump inhibitor is usually instituted. Fewer and fewer clinicians would still opt for an H2-receptor antagonist. If there is moderate or severe oesophagitis or if symptoms are particularly troublesome, then the patient should start with standard-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy once a day, but not uncommonly a b.d. dosage maybe necessary. Once the dose of the acid suppressant that relieves symptoms is found, this dose should be maintained for a period of 3 months. After this time, an attempt should be made to reduce the dose. If symptoms recur, then the patients should go back to the full-dose proton pump inhibitor and a plan should be formulated for long-term treatment. The long-term treatment options vary between ongoing acid and suppressant therapy, with occasional attempts to reduce the dose, or to go for ‘on demand’ therapy and (rarely) includes consideration for surgery or endoscopic anti-reflux therapy.

Notes: Ridogrel at low doses inhibits thromboxane synthase. Oral ridogrel, from 5 mg once daily to 150 mg twice daily, improves the endoscopic appearance of colonic mucosa and clinical manifestations in mild to moderate ulcerative colitis.〈section xml:id="abs1-2"〉〈title type="main"〉Aim:One US trial and one international trial were conducted to determine the effect of ridogrel on mild to severe active ulcerative colitis.〈section xml:id="abs1-3"〉〈title type="main"〉Methods:Two 12-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trials were conducted. A US trial compared 0.5 mg, 2.5 mg and 5 mg of ridogrel once daily with placebo. An international trial compared 0.5 mg of ridogrel once daily with 2.5 mg and 5.0 mg of ridogrel once daily and 800 mg of mesalazine (known as mesalamine in the USA) three times daily. The primary efficacy outcome measure was the rate of complete remission.〈section xml:id="abs1-4"〉〈title type="main"〉Results:In the US trial, complete remission was achieved in 20.8% of patients in the 0.5 mg ridogrel group, 17.9% in the 2.5 mg ridogrel group, 20.6% in the 5.0 mg ridogrel group and 13.6% in the placebo group. In the international trial, 14.4% of patients in the 0.5 mg ridogrel group, 19.6% in the 2.5 mg ridogrel group, 19.4% in the 5.0 mg ridogrel group and 16.4% in the mesalazine group experienced complete remission. In the international trial, rates of complete remission at the end-point were greater in the 2.5 mg and 5.0 mg ridogrel groups than in the 0.5 mg ridogrel group, but the differences were not statistically significant. In the US trial, rates of complete remission at the end-point were greater in the 2.5 mg and 5.0 mg ridogrel groups than in the placebo group, but the differences were not statistically significant. Approximately 30% of the patients in each group discontinued treatment before the 12-week end-point owing to a lack of therapeutic response. All doses of ridogrel were well tolerated and comparable with placebo or mesalazine in terms of safety.〈section xml:id="abs1-5"〉〈title type="main"〉Conclusions:No significant differences in the primary efficacy outcome measure were found between either the 2.5 mg or the 5.0 mg dose of ridogrel and placebo in the US trial and between either the 2.5 mg or the 5.0 mg dose of ridogrel and the 0.5 mg dose of ridogrel, a surrogate dose for placebo, in the international trial. There was no clear indication in either trial of an effective dose of ridogrel in the treatment of ulcerative colitis.