Urticaria is a common pediatric skin disorder. Histamine H1-receptor antagonists are effective in chronic as well as acute urticaria. When H1-anti-histamines are ineffective, add-on use of H2-receptor antagonists is t...Urticaria is a common pediatric skin disorder. Histamine H1-receptor antagonists are effective in chronic as well as acute urticaria. When H1-anti-histamines are ineffective, add-on use of H2-receptor antagonists is thought to give better symptom relief. However, there are few reports on the therapeutic efficacy in pediatric patients. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of pediatric patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (csU) who met the following criteria. They were consulted our outpatient clinic between April 2010 and March 2012;were unsuccessfully treated with H1 antihistamines;and were treated with add-on H2-receptor antagonist (famotidine). In six patients who met the inclusion criteria (mean age 6.1 ± 5.1 years), urticaria activity score was significantly decreased from 4.3 ± 0.8 just before administration of famotidine to 1.3 ± 1.0 on the first outpatient visit within 4 weeks after the first administration of famotidine展开更多
AIM: To compare the therapeutic effects of proton pump inhibitors vs H2 receptor antagonists for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients after successful endoscopy.METHODS: We searched the Cochrane library, MEDLIN...AIM: To compare the therapeutic effects of proton pump inhibitors vs H2 receptor antagonists for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients after successful endoscopy.METHODS: We searched the Cochrane library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Pub Med for randomized controlled trials until July 2014 for this study. The risk of bias was evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and all of the studies had acceptable quality. The main outcomes included mortality, re-bleeding, received surgery rate, blood transfusion units and hospital stay time. These outcomes were estimated using odds ratios(OR) and mean difference with 95% confidence interval(CI). Rev Man 5.3.3 software and Stata 12.0 software were used for data analyses. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials involving 1283 patients were included in this review; 678 subjects were in the proton pump inhibitors(PPI) group and the remaining 605 subjects were in the H2 receptor antagonists(H2RA) group. The meta-analysis results revealed that after successful endoscopic therapy, compared with H2 RA, PPI therapy had statistically significantly decreased the recurrent bleeding rate(OR = 0.36; 95%CI: 0.25-0.51) and receiving surgery rate(OR = 0.29; 95%CI: 0.09-0.96). There were no statistically significant differences in mortality(OR = 0.46; 95%CI: 0.17-1.23). However, significant heterogeneity was present in both the numbers of patients requiring blood transfusion after treatment [weighted mean difference(WMD),-0.70 unit; 95%CI:-1.64- 0.25] and the time that patients remained hospitalized [WMD,-0.77 d; 95%CI:-1.87- 0.34]. The Begg's test(P = 0.283) and Egger's test(P = 0.339) demonstrated that there was no publication bias in our meta-analysis.CONCLUSION: In patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding after successful endoscopic therapy, compared with H2 RA, PPI may be a more effective therapy.展开更多
AIM: To compare the antisecretory activity and plasma drug concentrations of a single oral dose of 10 mg lafutidine, a novel H2 receptor antagonist, with those of the proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole (LPZ) 30 mg. ME...AIM: To compare the antisecretory activity and plasma drug concentrations of a single oral dose of 10 mg lafutidine, a novel H2 receptor antagonist, with those of the proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole (LPZ) 30 mg. METHODS: Ten volunteers without H pylori infection participated in this crossover study comparing lafutidine 10 mg with LPZ 30 mg. Intragastric pH was monitored for 6 h in all participants, and blood samples were collected from four randomly selected individuals after single-dose administration of each drug. RESULTS: The median intragastric pH was significantly higher in individuals who received lafutidine 10 mg than in those who received LPZ 30 mg 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 h after administration. Maximal plasma drug concentration was reached more promptly with lafutidine 10 mg than with LPZ 30 mg. CONCLUSION: In H pylori-negative individuals, gastric acid secretion is more markedly inhibited by lafutidinethan by LPZ.展开更多
AIM: To systematically evaluate the efficacy of H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) and proton pump inhibitors in healing erosive esophagitis (EE).METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed. A literature search was conducted ...AIM: To systematically evaluate the efficacy of H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) and proton pump inhibitors in healing erosive esophagitis (EE).METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases to include randomized controlled head-to-head comparative trials evaluating the efficacy of H2RAs or proton pump inhibitors in healing EE. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated under a random-effects model.RESULTS: RRs of cumulative healing rates for each comparison at 8 wk were: high dose vs standard dose H2RAs,1.17 (95%CI, 1.02-1.33); standard dose proton pump inhibitors vsstandard dose H2RAs, 1.59 (95%CI, 1.44-1.75);standard dose other proton pump inhibitors vs standard dose omeprazole, 1.06 (95%CI, 0.98-1.06). Proton pump inhibitors produced consistently greater healing rates than H2RAs of all doses across all grades of esophagitis, including patients refractory to H2RAs. Healing rates achieved with standard dose omeprazole were similar to those with other proton pump inhibitors in all grades of esophagitis.CONCLUSION: H2RAS are less effective for treating patients with erosive esophagitis, especially in those with severe forms of esophagitis. Standard dose proton pump inhibitors are significantly more effective than H2RAs in healing esophagitis of all grades. Proton pump inhibitors given at the recommended dose are equally effective for healing esophagitis.展开更多
Purpose: Ranitidine hydrochloride (HCl) remains an important medication for treating acid-peptic ailments such as Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The main objective of this Post Marketing Surveillance (PMS) cl...Purpose: Ranitidine hydrochloride (HCl) remains an important medication for treating acid-peptic ailments such as Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The main objective of this Post Marketing Surveillance (PMS) clinical study was to test the efficacy and safety of Ranitidine HCl in Indian patients suffering from GERD. Patients and Methods: Data of 2446 patients (1307 males;1121 females) from 21 centers across India were analyzed. Patients received either of the three treatments: Ranitidine HCl 150 mg twice a day (BID) (ARM-A), Ranitidine HCl 300 mg once daily (OD) or BID (ARM-B), and Ranitidine HCl 300 mg OD (ARM-C). Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Symptom Assessment Scale (GSAS) score and Heartburn Severity score were used to assess the drug’s efficacy. The adverse events reported by patients or investigators were analyzed to assess the safety profile of Ranitidine. Results: Of the 2446 subjects screened, 2428 were enrolled. There was a significant reduction in GSAS scores from baseline to the end of the study visit in all three ARMs. The GSAS scores reduced from 2.02 to 0.23 in ARM-A, 2.01 to 0.24 in ARM-B, and 2.07 to 0.26 in ARM-C patients. In ARM A, 72.82% had 24 hours heartburn-free days, and 66.89% had 7 consecutive heartburn-free days, which was more significant than the other two ARMs. 128 (5.27%) patients reported ADRs due to Ranitidine HCl at different doses. The most frequently reported ADR was constipation (17.18%), followed by oliguria (14.06%), cold (13.28%), and dysuria (12.5%). Of 128 ADRs, 113 (88.28%) were mild, and only 11 (8.59%) ADRs were related to the study drug. No severe ADRs were reported during the study. Conclusion: Ranitidine HCl 150/300 mg tablet was found to be an effective and safe H2-receptor antagonist for treating GERD in Indian Patients.展开更多
文摘Urticaria is a common pediatric skin disorder. Histamine H1-receptor antagonists are effective in chronic as well as acute urticaria. When H1-anti-histamines are ineffective, add-on use of H2-receptor antagonists is thought to give better symptom relief. However, there are few reports on the therapeutic efficacy in pediatric patients. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of pediatric patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (csU) who met the following criteria. They were consulted our outpatient clinic between April 2010 and March 2012;were unsuccessfully treated with H1 antihistamines;and were treated with add-on H2-receptor antagonist (famotidine). In six patients who met the inclusion criteria (mean age 6.1 ± 5.1 years), urticaria activity score was significantly decreased from 4.3 ± 0.8 just before administration of famotidine to 1.3 ± 1.0 on the first outpatient visit within 4 weeks after the first administration of famotidine
基金Supported by National Natural Science Funds of China,No.81102784/H2803the key project in scientific research from ministry of education,No.212032Liaoning Innovative Research Team in University,No.LT2013022
文摘AIM: To compare the therapeutic effects of proton pump inhibitors vs H2 receptor antagonists for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients after successful endoscopy.METHODS: We searched the Cochrane library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Pub Med for randomized controlled trials until July 2014 for this study. The risk of bias was evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and all of the studies had acceptable quality. The main outcomes included mortality, re-bleeding, received surgery rate, blood transfusion units and hospital stay time. These outcomes were estimated using odds ratios(OR) and mean difference with 95% confidence interval(CI). Rev Man 5.3.3 software and Stata 12.0 software were used for data analyses. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials involving 1283 patients were included in this review; 678 subjects were in the proton pump inhibitors(PPI) group and the remaining 605 subjects were in the H2 receptor antagonists(H2RA) group. The meta-analysis results revealed that after successful endoscopic therapy, compared with H2 RA, PPI therapy had statistically significantly decreased the recurrent bleeding rate(OR = 0.36; 95%CI: 0.25-0.51) and receiving surgery rate(OR = 0.29; 95%CI: 0.09-0.96). There were no statistically significant differences in mortality(OR = 0.46; 95%CI: 0.17-1.23). However, significant heterogeneity was present in both the numbers of patients requiring blood transfusion after treatment [weighted mean difference(WMD),-0.70 unit; 95%CI:-1.64- 0.25] and the time that patients remained hospitalized [WMD,-0.77 d; 95%CI:-1.87- 0.34]. The Begg's test(P = 0.283) and Egger's test(P = 0.339) demonstrated that there was no publication bias in our meta-analysis.CONCLUSION: In patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding after successful endoscopic therapy, compared with H2 RA, PPI may be a more effective therapy.
文摘AIM: To compare the antisecretory activity and plasma drug concentrations of a single oral dose of 10 mg lafutidine, a novel H2 receptor antagonist, with those of the proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole (LPZ) 30 mg. METHODS: Ten volunteers without H pylori infection participated in this crossover study comparing lafutidine 10 mg with LPZ 30 mg. Intragastric pH was monitored for 6 h in all participants, and blood samples were collected from four randomly selected individuals after single-dose administration of each drug. RESULTS: The median intragastric pH was significantly higher in individuals who received lafutidine 10 mg than in those who received LPZ 30 mg 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 h after administration. Maximal plasma drug concentration was reached more promptly with lafutidine 10 mg than with LPZ 30 mg. CONCLUSION: In H pylori-negative individuals, gastric acid secretion is more markedly inhibited by lafutidinethan by LPZ.
基金Supported by the Gastroenterological Research Fund, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
文摘AIM: To systematically evaluate the efficacy of H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) and proton pump inhibitors in healing erosive esophagitis (EE).METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases to include randomized controlled head-to-head comparative trials evaluating the efficacy of H2RAs or proton pump inhibitors in healing EE. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated under a random-effects model.RESULTS: RRs of cumulative healing rates for each comparison at 8 wk were: high dose vs standard dose H2RAs,1.17 (95%CI, 1.02-1.33); standard dose proton pump inhibitors vsstandard dose H2RAs, 1.59 (95%CI, 1.44-1.75);standard dose other proton pump inhibitors vs standard dose omeprazole, 1.06 (95%CI, 0.98-1.06). Proton pump inhibitors produced consistently greater healing rates than H2RAs of all doses across all grades of esophagitis, including patients refractory to H2RAs. Healing rates achieved with standard dose omeprazole were similar to those with other proton pump inhibitors in all grades of esophagitis.CONCLUSION: H2RAS are less effective for treating patients with erosive esophagitis, especially in those with severe forms of esophagitis. Standard dose proton pump inhibitors are significantly more effective than H2RAs in healing esophagitis of all grades. Proton pump inhibitors given at the recommended dose are equally effective for healing esophagitis.
文摘Purpose: Ranitidine hydrochloride (HCl) remains an important medication for treating acid-peptic ailments such as Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The main objective of this Post Marketing Surveillance (PMS) clinical study was to test the efficacy and safety of Ranitidine HCl in Indian patients suffering from GERD. Patients and Methods: Data of 2446 patients (1307 males;1121 females) from 21 centers across India were analyzed. Patients received either of the three treatments: Ranitidine HCl 150 mg twice a day (BID) (ARM-A), Ranitidine HCl 300 mg once daily (OD) or BID (ARM-B), and Ranitidine HCl 300 mg OD (ARM-C). Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Symptom Assessment Scale (GSAS) score and Heartburn Severity score were used to assess the drug’s efficacy. The adverse events reported by patients or investigators were analyzed to assess the safety profile of Ranitidine. Results: Of the 2446 subjects screened, 2428 were enrolled. There was a significant reduction in GSAS scores from baseline to the end of the study visit in all three ARMs. The GSAS scores reduced from 2.02 to 0.23 in ARM-A, 2.01 to 0.24 in ARM-B, and 2.07 to 0.26 in ARM-C patients. In ARM A, 72.82% had 24 hours heartburn-free days, and 66.89% had 7 consecutive heartburn-free days, which was more significant than the other two ARMs. 128 (5.27%) patients reported ADRs due to Ranitidine HCl at different doses. The most frequently reported ADR was constipation (17.18%), followed by oliguria (14.06%), cold (13.28%), and dysuria (12.5%). Of 128 ADRs, 113 (88.28%) were mild, and only 11 (8.59%) ADRs were related to the study drug. No severe ADRs were reported during the study. Conclusion: Ranitidine HCl 150/300 mg tablet was found to be an effective and safe H2-receptor antagonist for treating GERD in Indian Patients.
