DOCSLIB.ORG

031998 a Comparison of Sucralfate and Ranitidine

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
031998 a Comparison of Sucralfate and Ranitidine COMPARISON OF SUCRALFATE AND RANITIDINE TO PREVENT UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING A COMPARISON OF SUCRALFATE AND RANITIDINE FOR THE PREVENTION OF UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING IN PATIENTS REQUIRING MECHANICAL VENTILATION DEBORAH COOK, M.D., GORDON GUYATT, M.D., JOHN MARSHALL, M.D., DAVID LEASA, M.D., HUGH FULLER, M.B., RICHARD HALL, M.D., SHARON PETERS, M.D., FRANK RUTLEDGE, M.D., LAUREN GRIFFITH, M.SC., ALLAN MCLELLAN, M.D., GORDON WOOD, M.D., AND ANN KIRBY, M.D., FOR THE CANADIAN CRITICAL CARE TRIALS GROUP* ABSTRACT and coagulopathy are the strongest risk factors for Background Critically ill patients who require me- clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding.8-11 chanical ventilation are at increased risk for gastro- Randomized trials of prophylaxis against stress ul- intestinal bleeding from stress ulcers. There are con- cers, as compared with no prophylaxis, indicate that flicting data on the effect of histamine H2-receptor histamine H2-receptor antagonists and antacids pre- antagonists and the cytoprotective agent sucralfate vent clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding.12 on rates of gastrointestinal bleeding, ventilator-asso- Observational studies have suggested, however, that ciated pneumonia, and mortality. a higher gastric pH is associated with gastric micro- Methods In a multicenter, randomized, blinded, bial growth,13 tracheobronchial colonization,14 and placebo-controlled trial, we compared sucralfate with nosocomial pneumonia.15 In randomized trials, the the H2-receptor antagonist ranitidine for the preven- tion of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in 1200 pa- cytoprotective agent sucralfate, which does not alter tients who required mechanical ventilation. Patients the gastric pH, has been associated with a trend received either nasogastric sucralfate suspension (1 g toward a lower incidence of ventilator-associated every six hours) and an intravenous placebo or intra- pneumonia, both as compared with histamine H2- venous ranitidine (50 mg every eight hours) and a receptor antagonists and antacids16 and as compared nasogastric placebo. 17-30 with H2-receptor antagonists alone. Results The patients in the two groups had similar The need to evaluate patients at highest risk for base-line characteristics. Clinically important gastro- both bleeding and pneumonia31 and the need to intestinal bleeding developed in 10 of 596 (1.7 per- blind care givers and research personnel to the treat- cent) of the patients receiving ranitidine, as com- ment assignments, in order to minimize inflated treat- pared with 23 of 604 (3.8 percent) of those receiving 32 sucralfate (relative risk, 0.44; 95 percent confidence ment effects, prompted us to evaluate the rates of interval, 0.21 to 0.92; Pϭ0.02). In the ranitidine group, clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, venti- 114 of 596 patients (19.1 percent) had ventilator-asso- lator-associated pneumonia, and mortality in a ran- ciated pneumonia, as compared with 98 of 604 (16.2 domized trial of 1200 patients who required me- percent) in the sucralfate group (relative risk, 1.18; 95 chanical ventilation and who were assigned to receive percent confidence interval, 0.92 to 1.51; Pϭ0.19). either ranitidine or sucralfate. There was no significant difference between the groups in mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) METHODS (23.5 percent in the ranitidine group and 22.8 percent Enrollment in the sucralfate group) or the duration of the stay in the ICU (median, nine days in both groups). From October 1992 to May 1996, we screened consecutive pa- Conclusions Among critically ill patients requir- tients admitted to 16 participating intensive care units (ICUs) to identify adults who were projected to require mechanical ventila- ing mechanical ventilation, those receiving raniti- tion for at least 48 hours. Criteria for exclusion were a diagnosis dine had a significantly lower rate of clinically impor- of gastrointestinal bleeding or pneumonia on admission, gastrec- tant gastrointestinal bleeding than those treated tomy, a prognosis considered to be hopeless, previous randomiza- with sucralfate. There were no significant differences tion in this or another trial, or receipt of two or more previous in the rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia, the doses of open-label prophylactic therapy. The protocol was ap- duration of the stay in the ICU, or mortality. (N Engl J Med 1998;338:791-7.) ©1998, Massachusetts Medical Society. From McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont. (D.C., G.G., H.F., L.G., A.M.); the University of Toronto, Toronto (J.M.); the University of West- ROPHYLAXIS against stress ulcers has tra- ern Ontario, London (D.L., F.R., A.K.); Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S. (R.H.); Memorial University, St. John’s, Newf. (S.P.); and Queen’s ditionally been recommended for the pre- University, Kingston, Ont. (G.W.) — all in Canada. Address reprint re- vention of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in quests to Dr. Cook at the Department of Medicine, St. Joseph’s Hospital, critically ill patients.1-3 Recent natural-histo- 50 Charlton Ave., Hamilton, ON L8N 4A6, Canada. Pry studies have documented a very low incidence of Other authors were Martin Tweeddale, M.D., University of British Co- lumbia, Vancouver; Joe Pagliarello, M.D., University of Ottawa, Ottawa, bleeding,4 however, suggesting that universal pro- Ont.; and Richard Johnston, M.D., University of Alberta, Edmonton. phylaxis may not be warranted.5-7 Respiratory failure *Other study investigators are listed in the Appendix. Volume 338 Number 12 ؒ 791 The New England Journal of Medicine proved by the institutional review boards of all the participating of units transfused minus 2 (i.e., if 4 units of packed cells were centers, and the patients or their proxies gave informed consent. transfused, the bleeding would be considered clinically important if the hemoglobin concentration did not rise by at least 2 g per Randomization deciliter). Patients were randomly assigned to study groups in blocks of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia six, with stratification according to center, by means of a comput- er-generated random-number table prepared at the McMaster Attending intensivists at each center used a modified version of University Methods Center and managed by the ICU study phar- the criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention macist at each site who administered the coded drugs. All care (CDC)36 to identify patients in whom pneumonia was suspected givers and other research personnel were unaware of the random- on clinical grounds. These criteria were a new radiographic infil- ization schedule and the block size. trate that had persisted for at least 48 hours (as interpreted by designated study radiologists blinded to the patients’ treatment Blinding assignments) plus at least two of the following: a temperature above 38.5°C or below 35.0°C, a leukocyte count of more than The patients, research nurses, and all ICU care givers were un- 10,000 per cubic millimeter or less than 3000 per cubic millime- aware of the treatment assignments for the duration of the study. ter, purulent sputum, or isolation of pathogenic bacteria from an Therefore, clinicians did not monitor gastric pH. The radiolo- endotracheal aspirate. gists, outcome adjudicators, all investigators, and the study statis- Patients in whom ventilator-associated pneumonia was suspect- tician were also blinded until all events had been adjudicated and ed on clinical grounds underwent bronchoalveolar lavage or pro- the analyses completed. tected brush-catheter sampling by the study bronchoscopist.37,38 Two members of the pneumonia-adjudication committee exam- Drug Preparation, Dispensing, and Administration ined all relevant clinical and diagnostic documents related to pos- The bags of ranitidine (Zantac, Glaxo Wellcome; prepared by sible cases of pneumonia in duplicate and independently, classify- Baxter) and ranitidine placebo were identical in appearance. The ing patients according to several different methods. One method 36 sucralfate (Sulcrate, Hoechst Marion Roussel) and sucralfate pla- used was the modified CDC criteria described above ; another cebo slurries were identical in color, taste, and consistency. From was the Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score devised by Pugin et coded ranitidine bags and sucralfate bottles stored in each ICU al. (range, 0 to 12, with pneumonia defined by a score of 7 or 39 pharmacy, study pharmacists dispensed either active ranitidine higher). In addition, adjudicators used the criteria of the Mem- (50 mg every eight hours) and sucralfate placebo or active sucral- phis Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia Consensus Conference for fate (1 g every six hours) and ranitidine placebo. definite ventilator-associated pneumonia (if there was radiograph- Ranitidine was administered in intravenous bolus form, with ic evidence of abscess and a positive needle aspirate, or if there the dose adjusted for renal failure as follows: standard dose, 50 was histologic proof of pneumonia at biopsy or autopsy) and mg every 8 hours; dose for patients with an estimated creatinine probable ventilator-associated pneumonia (if bronchoalveolar la- clearance rate of 25 to 50 ml per minute, 50 mg every 12 hours; vage or protected brush-catheter sampling yielded positive quan- dose for patients with an estimated creatinine clearance rate below titative or semiquantitative cultures, if there was a positive blood 25 ml per minute, 50 mg every 24 hours; and dose for patients culture of an organism found within 48 hours of isolation in the dependent
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Role for Pre-Polymerized Sucralfate In
    ISSN: 2692-5400 DOI: 10.33552/AJGH.2020.02.000531 Academic Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology Review Article Copyright © All rights are reserved by Ricky Wayne McCullough The Role for Pre-Polymerized Sucralfate in Management of Erosive and Non-Erosive Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease – High Potency Sucralfate-Mucin Barrier for Enteric Cytoprotection Ricky Wayne McCullough1,2* 1Translational Medicine Clinic and Research Center, USA 2Department of Internal Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Warren Alpert Brown University School of Medicine, USA *Corresponding author: Ricky Wayne McCullough, Translational Medicine Clinic and Received Date: April 13, 2020 Research Center, Storrs Connecticut, USA. Published Date: April 22, 2020 Abstract Pre-polymerized sucralfate, sometimes called high potency sucralfate or polymerized cross-linked sucralfate is a new sucralfate formulation recognizedClinical by outcomes the US FDAfrom in standard 2005. Positive sucralfate clinical do not data justify from a threerole in randomized the management controlled of erosive trials and using non-erosive pre-polymerized gastroesophageal sucralfate refluxfor GERD disease. and each of which cause classic mucosal reactions in the esophageal epithelium. These reactions are symptomatic but may or may not involve erosions. NERD was first reported in 2014 AGA’s Digestive Disease Week (DDW). Gastric refluxate contains protonic acid, dissolved bile acids and proteases Pre-polymerizedBeing non-systemic, sucralfate the utilizes entire biophysical clinical effect means of toany exclude sucralfate all three rests irritants in the fromsurface epithelial concentration mucosa. of sucralfate achieved. Pre-polymerized sucralfate, presented in 2014 DDW, and discussed here, achieves a surface concentration that is 800% greater than standard sucralfate on normal mucosal lining and 2,400% greater on inflamed or acid-injured mucosa, making it most certainly, a high potency sucralfate.
    [Show full text]
  • Lansoprazole Delayed-Release Orally Disintegrating Tablets PI
    HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESCRIBING INFORMATION • Patients receiving rilpivirine-containing products. (4, 7) Dual Therapy: Lansoprazole delayed-release orally disintegrating tablets/amoxicillin Administration with Water in an Oral Syringe 6.1 Clinical Trials Experience In clinical trials using combination therapy with lansoprazole plus amoxicillin and clarithromycin, women. Because animal reproduction studies are not always predictive of human response, this 8.6 Hepatic Impairment These highlights do not include all the information WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS Lansoprazole delayed-release orally disintegrating tablets in combination with amoxicillin as dual 1. Place a 15 mg tablet in oral syringe and draw up 4 mL of water, or place a 30 mg tablet Because clinical trials are conducted under widely varying conditions, adverse reaction rates and lansoprazole plus amoxicillin, no increased laboratory abnormalities particular to these drug drug should be used during pregnancy only if clearly needed [see Nonclinical Toxicology (13.2)]. In patients with various degrees of chronic hepatic impairment the exposure to lansoprazole was needed to use LANSOPRAZOLE DELAYED- • Gastric Malignancy: In adults, symptomatic therapy is indicated in adults for the treatment of patients with H. pylori infection and duodenal in oral syringe and draw up 10 mL of water. observed in the clinical trials of a drug cannot be directly compared to rates in the clinical trials of combinations were observed. See full prescribing information for clarithromycin before using in pregnant women. increased compared to healthy subjects with normal hepatic function [see Clinical Pharmacology RELEASE ORALLY DISINTEGRATING TABLETS response with lansoprazole does not preclude ulcer disease (active or one year history of a duodenal ulcer) who are either allergic or intolerant 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Carafate, Tablet
    NEW ZEALAND DATA SHEET CARAFATE 1. Product Name Carafate, 1 g, tablet. 2. Qualitative and Quantitative Composition Each tablet contains 1 g sucralfate For the full list of excipients, see section 6.1. 3. Pharmaceutical Form Carafate is a white, uncoated capsule-shaped tablet. One side is plain, the other embossed with the word ‘CARAFATE’. Dimensions: 20 mm x 9 mm x 7mm 4. Clinical Particulars 4.1 Therapeutic indications Treatment of acute, non-malignant gastric ulcer and duodenal ulcer. Maintenance therapy to prevent the recurrence of duodenal ulcers. 4.2 Dose and method of administration Acute ulcerous conditions The recommended adult dose of Carafate for duodenal ulcer and gastric ulcer is 1 g tablet three times a day, one hour before meals and one 1 g tablet at bedtime or two 1 g tablets twice daily taken before breakfast and at bedtime (for up to 8 weeks). For relief of pain, antacids may be added to the treatment. However, they should not be taken within two hours before or after sucralfate intake. In duodenal ulcer, while healing with sucralfate often occurs within two to four weeks, treatment should be continued for up to 8 weeks unless healing has been demonstrated by x-ray and/or endoscopic examination. In the case of gastric ulcers an alternative treatment should be considered if no objective improvement is observed following 6 weeks of sucralfate therapy. Large gastric ulcers that show a progressive healing tendency may require the full 8 weeks of therapy. Maintenance treatment To reduce the risk of recurrence of duodenal ulcers, the recommended dose is one 1 g tablet before breakfast and one at bedtime (for up to 12 months).
    [Show full text]
  • Patient Instructions for Colonoscopy and Upper GI Endoscopy
    GASTROENTEROLOGY Patient Instructions for Colonoscopy and Upper GI Endoscopy This handout will help you get ready for your procedures. It has information about: Where to go for your procedures What are the procedures and why are they done Preparing ahead of time for your procedures Bowel preparation instructions Medication and diet instructions before your procedures What to expect during your procedures WHERE TO GO FOR YOUR COLONOSCOPY/UPPER ENDOSCOPY UVM Medical Center 111 Colchester Ave Endoscopy Outpatient Clinic West Pavilion, Level 4 Burlington, VT 05401 Check in at registration first: Level 3, Main Lobby WHAT IS A COLONOSCOPY? A colonoscopy is an examination of the colon (large intestine) using a specialized video camera called an endoscope. This instrument is inserted into the rectum and advanced up into your large intestine until it meets the small intestine. It shows images of the lining of the large intestine. Tissue samples (biopsies) may be taken during the test. This test can help diagnose and potentially treat: Early signs of cancer in the colon and rectum, specifically remove these abnormal growths called polyps Causes of unexplained changes in bowel habits Causes of inflamed tissue, abnormal growths, ulcers and bleeding WHAT IS AN UPPER ENDOSCOPY? Also known as: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy; EGD, Gastroscopy. An upper GI endoscopy is an examination of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract using a specialized video camera called an endoscope. This instrument is inserted down the throat and shows images of the lining
    [Show full text]
  • Patent Application Publication ( 10 ) Pub . No . : US 2019 / 0192440 A1
    US 20190192440A1 (19 ) United States (12 ) Patent Application Publication ( 10) Pub . No. : US 2019 /0192440 A1 LI (43 ) Pub . Date : Jun . 27 , 2019 ( 54 ) ORAL DRUG DOSAGE FORM COMPRISING Publication Classification DRUG IN THE FORM OF NANOPARTICLES (51 ) Int . CI. A61K 9 / 20 (2006 .01 ) ( 71 ) Applicant: Triastek , Inc. , Nanjing ( CN ) A61K 9 /00 ( 2006 . 01) A61K 31/ 192 ( 2006 .01 ) (72 ) Inventor : Xiaoling LI , Dublin , CA (US ) A61K 9 / 24 ( 2006 .01 ) ( 52 ) U . S . CI. ( 21 ) Appl. No. : 16 /289 ,499 CPC . .. .. A61K 9 /2031 (2013 . 01 ) ; A61K 9 /0065 ( 22 ) Filed : Feb . 28 , 2019 (2013 .01 ) ; A61K 9 / 209 ( 2013 .01 ) ; A61K 9 /2027 ( 2013 .01 ) ; A61K 31/ 192 ( 2013. 01 ) ; Related U . S . Application Data A61K 9 /2072 ( 2013 .01 ) (63 ) Continuation of application No. 16 /028 ,305 , filed on Jul. 5 , 2018 , now Pat . No . 10 , 258 ,575 , which is a (57 ) ABSTRACT continuation of application No . 15 / 173 ,596 , filed on The present disclosure provides a stable solid pharmaceuti Jun . 3 , 2016 . cal dosage form for oral administration . The dosage form (60 ) Provisional application No . 62 /313 ,092 , filed on Mar. includes a substrate that forms at least one compartment and 24 , 2016 , provisional application No . 62 / 296 , 087 , a drug content loaded into the compartment. The dosage filed on Feb . 17 , 2016 , provisional application No . form is so designed that the active pharmaceutical ingredient 62 / 170, 645 , filed on Jun . 3 , 2015 . of the drug content is released in a controlled manner. Patent Application Publication Jun . 27 , 2019 Sheet 1 of 20 US 2019 /0192440 A1 FIG .
    [Show full text]
  • Mini-Reviews and Perspectives
    Mini-Reviews and Perspectives Persistent Reflux Symptoms in the Proton Pump Inhibitor Era: The Changing Face of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease EVAN S. DELLON and NICHOLAS J. SHAHEEN Center for Esophageal Diseases and Swallowing and Center for Gastrointestinal Biology and Disease, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina iven the widespread use of potent acid suppressive Despite the common nature of incomplete control of Gtherapies and primary caregivers’ increasing com- GERD symptoms on PPI therapy, a universal definition fort with prescribing these medications at high doses, the for “PPI-refractory GERD” is lacking. Is a subject PPI patient population presenting to gastroenterologists for refractory after incomplete control at once daily dosing? symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has Should twice daily (BID) or other regimens be required changed. Whereas previous consultation often revolved before a subject is considered refractory? Previous work around the control of erosive disease and other mucosal demonstrates that a substantial number of subjects (as manifestations of GERD, and terminated with the prescrip- high as 32%) on daily PPI continue to demonstrate ab- tion of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, gastroenter- normal distal esophageal acid exposures, and that this ologists often now only enter the scene after failure of PPI proportion can be lowered to single digits by increasing therapy, for symptoms either resistant or only partially standard therapy to BID PPI.6,7 However, US Food and responsive to these medications. Because of the high pro- Drug Administration-approved dosing of these medica- portion of subjects with esophagitis who are healed with tions does not extend to BID therapy.
    [Show full text]
  • Pediatric REVIEW
    DIVISION OF GASTROENTEROLOGY PRODUCTS MEDICAL OFFICER REVIEW Application Type: NDA Submission Number: 20-406/067 21-281/024 21-428/017 Letter Date: 04-25-08 Stamp Date: 04-28-08 PDUFA Goal Date: 10-28-08 Reviewer Name: Ali Niak, M.D. Reviewer Completion Date: 10-27-08 Established Name: Lansoprazole (Proposed) Trade Name: Prevacid Pediatric Suspension Therapeutic Class: Proton Pump Inhibitor Applicant: TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc. Priority Designation: Standard Formulation: Oral Suspension Dosing Regimen: 0.2-0.3 mg/kg/day for infants ≤ 10 weeks of age or 1.0-1.5 mg/kg/day > 10 weeks of age Indication: treatment of symptomatic GERD patients Intended Population: Pediatric patients, > 28 days since birth (preterm infants with corrected age of at least 44 weeks) but < 12 months of age at Dosing Day 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. RECOMMENDATIONS/RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS ……………………..5 1.1 Recommendation on Regulatory Action ……………………...………….5 1.2 Risk Benefit Analysis …………………………………………………….5 1.3 Recommendations for Postmarketing Risk Management Activities ……..5 1.4 Recommendations for other Postmarketing Study Commitments ………..5 2. INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND ………………...5 2.1 Product Information ………………………………………………………7 2.2 Currently Available Treatment for Indication ……………………………8 2.3 Availability of Proposed Active Ingredient in the United States …………8 2.4 Important Issues With Consideration to Related Drugs ………………….9 2.5 Summary of Presubmission Regulatory Activity Related to this Submission ……………………………………………………………….9 2.6 Other Relevant Background Information …………………………….....10 3. ETHICS AND GOOD CLINICAL PRACTICES …………………………...11 3.1 Submission Quality and Integrity ………………………………….……11 3.2 Compliance with Good Practices ………………………………………..11 3.3 Financial Disclosures ……………………………………………………11 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Esomeprazole, NDA 22-101
    CLINICAL REVIEW DIVISION OF GASTROENTEROLOGY PRODUCTS Application Type NDA Submission Number 22-101/000 Letter Date Sept. 27, 2006 Stamp Date Sept. 29, 2006 PDUFA Goal Date July 29, 2007 Reviewer Name Wen-Yi Gao, M.D., Ph.D. Review Completion Date July 19, 2007 Established Name Esomeprazole magnesium (Proposed) Trade Name Nexium Therapeutic Class Proton Pump Inhibitor Applicant AstraZeneca Priority Designation S Formulation Delayed-Release Granules for Oral Suspension Dosing Regimen 10 mg once daily for up to 8 weeks Indication Short-term treatment of symptomatic GERD and erosive esophagitis Intended Population 1 to 11 years of age Clinical Review Wen-Yi Gao, M.D., Ph.D. NDA 22-101/000 Nexium (esomeprazole) Table of Contents CLINICAL REVIEW..................................................................................................................................................1 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................................5 1.1 RECOMMENDATION ON REGULATORY ACTION ...........................................................................................5 1.2 RECOMMENDATION ON POSTMARKETING ACTIONS ....................................................................................5 1.2.1 Risk Management Activity ....................................................................................................................5 1.3 SUMMARY OF CLINICAL FINDINGS ..............................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Sucralfate in the Treatment and Prevention of Gastric Ulcer: Multicentre Double Blind Placebo Controlled Study
    Gut, 1990,31,825-830 825 CLINICAL TRIAL Gut: first published as 10.1136/gut.31.7.825 on 1 July 1990. Downloaded from Sucralfate in the treatment and prevention of gastric ulcer: multicentre double blind placebo controlled study A L Blum, H Bethge, J Ch Bode, W Domschke, G Feurle, K Hackenberg, B Hammer, W Huttemann, M Jung, G Kachel, H Kaess, B C Manegold, P Peter, T Pfleiderer, H G Rohner, U Rasenack, R Sanwald, G A Stalder, J-J Vallotton Abstract following reasons: a small number of patients A randomised controlled multicentre trial was admitted to the trial,33 a short duratiqh of only performed in 160 patients with gastric ulcer, six months,432 ' failure to standardise initial proved by endoscopy and biopsy, to compare ulcer treatment,203335 administration of different ulcer healing with sucralfate and ranitidine doses of sucralfate during maintenance treat- (double blind double dummy design) and to ment,42032-35 problems with randomisation and assess the effect of maintenance treatment blinding,4 and inclusion of patients with pyloric with sucralfate on ulcer recurrence (double ulcers in the gastric ulcer group.20 Some groups blind placebo controlied design). The healing of patients appear in more than one publica- rates were similar with 4 g sucralfate suspen- tion3336 but are often quoted as belonging to sion per day and 300 mg ranitidine per day (82% different studies. Information on 497 patients and 88% after 12 weeks, respectively). Of the with gastric ulcer is available from these 109 patients with healed ulcers, 92 were trials.42032-35 The four placebo controlled trials entered into the maintenance trial and treated lasting for six months gave widely differing http://gut.bmj.com/ with sucralfate tablets (2 g per day) or placebo results; the overall recurrence rate was lower tablets.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Adverse Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitors PAUL W
    Editor’s note: In violation of our conflict of interest policy, Dr. Ament failed to disclose financial relationships with two pharmaceutical companies that existed at the time of submission and publication of this article. His disclosure statement has been corrected. Reducing Adverse Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitors PAUL W. AMENT, PharmD; DANIEL B. DICOLA, MD; and MARY E. JAMES, MD Excela Health Latrobe Family Medicine Residency Program, Latrobe, Pennsylvania Proton pump inhibitors effectively treat gastroesophageal reflux disease, erosive esophagitis, duodenal ulcers, and pathologic hypersecretory conditions. Proton pump inhibitors cause few adverse effects with short-term use; however, long-term use has been scrutinized for appropri- ateness, drug-drug interactions, and the potential for adverse effects (e.g., hip fractures, cardiac events, iron deficiency, Clostridium difficile infection, pneumonia). Adults 65 years and older are more vulnerable to these adverse effects because of the higher prevalence of chronic diseases in this population. Proton pump inhibitors administered for stress ulcer prophylaxis should be discontinued after the patient is discharged from the intensive care unit unless other indica- tions exist. (Am Fam Physician. 2012;86(1):66-70. Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Family Physicians.) ▲ Patient information: n 1990, the U.S. Food and Drug Admin- higher risk of these adverse effects because of A handout on side effects istration (FDA) approved omeprazole the higher prevalence of chronic diseases in of proton pump inhibitors, written by the authors (Prilosec), the first proton pump inhib- this population. of this article, is avail- itor (PPI), for the short-term treatment able at http://www. I of gastroesophageal reflux disease, active HIP FRACTURE aafp.org/afp/2012/0701/ duodenal ulcer, severe erosive esophagitis, A retrospective study in the United King- p66-s1.html.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Oral Sucralfate on Postprandial Proximal Gastric Acid Pocket
    Original Article Page 1 of 7 The effect of oral sucralfate on postprandial proximal gastric acid pocket Luciana C. Silva, Fernando A. M. Herbella Department of Surgery, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil Contributions: (I) Conception and design: All authors; (II) Administrative support: None; (III) Provision of study materials or patients: None; (IV) Collection and assembly of data: All authors; (V) Data analysis and interpretation: All authors; (VI) Manuscript writing: All authors; (VII) Final approval of manuscript: All authors. Correspondence to: Dr. Fernando A. M. Herbella, MD. Department of Surgery, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Federal University of São Paulo, Rua Diogo de Faria 1087/301, São Paulo, SP 04037-003, Brazil. Email: [email protected]. Background: A postprandial proximal gastric acid pocket (PPGAP) that escapes neutralization by food was demonstrated in volunteers and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients. It is elusive; however, if this acid layer is morphologically best conceptualized as a real pocket or a film. This study aims to analyze the effect of oral sucralfate administration on PPGAP to shed some light on PPGAP morphology and treatment. Methods: Twenty-six patients (mean age 51 years, 19 females) were studied. A pull-through pH monitoring was performed from 5 cm below the lower border of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) to the actual border in increments of 1 cm, in a fasting state, 10 min after a fatty meal and 10 min after oral sucralfate administration. PPGAP was defined by an acid reading (pH <4) in the proximal stomach between non-acid segments distally (food) and proximally (proximal pH transition point).
    [Show full text]
  • REVISÃO / REVIEW but It Is Interesting to Review Some Aspects of the GERD Refractory Patients to the Proton Pump Inhibitors Treatment
    ARQGA/1633 REFRACTORY GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE Joaquim Prado P. MORAES-FILHO* ABSTRACT - Context - Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a condition which develops when the reflux of stomach contents causes troublesome symptoms and/or complications. Its pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment have frequently been analyzed REVISÃO / REVIEW but it is interesting to review some aspects of the GERD refractory patients to the proton pump inhibitors treatment. The treatment encompasses behavioral measures and pharmacological therapy. The majority of the patients respond well to proton pump inhibi- tors treatment but 20%-42% of them may not do so well. Patients who are unresponsible to 4-8 weeks’ treatment with proton pump inhibitors (omeprazole, pantoprazole, rabeprazole, lansoprazole, esomeprazole, pantoprazole-Mg) might have so-called refractory GERD. Results - In some cases the patients are not real refractory because either they do not have GERD or the disease was not correctly treated, but the term refractory is still employed. Although debatable, the Brazilian GERD Consensus based upon evidences recommends as first step in the diagnosis, the upper digestive endoscopy to exclude the diagnosis of peptic ulcer and cancer and in some cases identify the presence of esophageal mucosa erosions. Conclusions - The main causes of the so-called refractory GERD are: (1) functional heartburn; (2) low levels of adherence to proton pump inhibitors treatment; (3) inadequate proton pump inhibitors dosage; (4) wrong diagnosis; (5) co-morbidities and pill-induced esophagitis; (6) genotypic differences; (7) nonacid gastroesophageal reflux; (8) autoimmune skin diseases; (9) eosinophilic esophagitis. HEADINGS – Gastroesophageal reflux, drug therapy. Proton pump inhibitors. INTRODUCTION failure may occur. In fact, unfortunately 20% to 42% of the cases may not respond to PPI therapy, with Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a persistence of reflux symptoms or even the occurrence condition that develops when the reflux of stomach of new symptoms and esophagitis(2).
    [Show full text]