AIM：TO compare the efficacy and safety of dexrabe-prazole 10 mg versus rabeprazole 20 mg in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease （GERD）.METHODS： This was a randomized, double-blind clinical study. Fift...AIM：TO compare the efficacy and safety of dexrabe-prazole 10 mg versus rabeprazole 20 mg in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease （GERD）.METHODS： This was a randomized, double-blind clinical study. Fifty patients with GERD were randomly assigned to receive dexrabeprazole 10 mg or rabeprazole 20 mg once daily. Efficacy was assessed by evaluating improvement in visual analog scale （VAS） scores of heart-burn and regurgitation and safety was assessed by recording incidence of any adverse drug reactions. Laboratory investigations and upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy was conducted at baseline and after 28 d of therapy.RESULTS： A total of 50 patients （n = 25 in dexrabeprazole group and rabeprazole group each） completed the study. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. The VAS score （mean 4. SD） of heartburn and regurgitation in dexrabeprazole （64.8±5.1 and 64 ± 8.1, respectively） and rabeprazole （64.4 ± 8.7 and 57.6 ± 9.7, respectively） groups significantly reduced （P 〈 0.0001） to 30 ± 11.5, 24 ± 10 and 32 ± 9.5, 29.2±11.9, respectively on d 28. A significantly higher （P = 0.002） proportion of patients showed ≥ 50% improvement in regurgitation with dexrabeprazole 10 mg （96%） compared to rabeprazole 20 mg （60%）. Onset of symptom improvement was significantly earlier with dexrabeprazole than with rabeprazole （1.8 ± 0.8 d vs 2.6 ± 1.4 d; P 〈0.05）. The incidences of esophagitis in the dexrabeprazole group and rabeprazole group before therapy were 84% and 92%, respectively （P = 0.38）. The incidence of improvement/healing of esophagitis after therapy was more （P = 0,036） in the dexrabeprazole group （95.2%） compared to the rabeprazole group （65.2%）. No adverse drug reaction was seen in either group.CONCLUSION： In the treatment of GERD, efficacy of dexrabeprazole 10 mg is better than rabeprazole 20 mg, with regards to improvement/healing of endoscopic lesions and relief from symptoms of regurgitation.展开更多
AIM： To investigate if differences exist for patients＇ gastroesophageal reflux as measured by the Bravo ambulatory esophageal pH system between d 1 and d 2.METHODS： A retrospective study of 27 consecutive adult pat...AIM： To investigate if differences exist for patients＇ gastroesophageal reflux as measured by the Bravo ambulatory esophageal pH system between d 1 and d 2.METHODS： A retrospective study of 27 consecutive adult patients who underwent Bravo esophageal pH monitoring was performed. Patients underwent EGD under Ⅳ conscious sedation prior to Bravo placement. Acid reflux variables and symptom scores for d 1 were compared to d 2.RESULTS： The mean doses of fentanyl and midazolam were 90.4 μg and 7.2 mg, respectively. D 1 results were significantly more elevated than d 2 with respect to total time pH 〈 4, upright position reflux, and mean number of long refluxes. No statistical difference was noted between the two days for supine position reflux, number of refluxes, duration of longest reflux, episodes of heartburn, and symptom score.CONCLUSION： Patients undergoing Bravo esophageal pH monitoring in association with EGD and moderate conscious sedation experience significantly more acid reflux on d i compared to d 2. The Ⅳ sedation may be responsible for the increased reflux on d 1. Performed this way, 48-h Bravo results may not be entirely representative of the patients＇ true GE reflux profile.展开更多
文摘9713077 唾液特异性免疫球蛋白 G 在诊断消化不良患者幽门螺杆菌感染中的应用/Luzza F//Am J Gastroenterol.-1995,90(10).-1820～1823 友谊医9713078 消化系统疾病与经口免疫耐受性[日]/日比纪文//医学.-1995,177(5).-418 医科图9713079 成人腹腔病患者中有或无麦片膳食的比较/Janatuinen E K//New Eng JMed.-1995,333(16).
文摘AIM：TO compare the efficacy and safety of dexrabe-prazole 10 mg versus rabeprazole 20 mg in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease （GERD）.METHODS： This was a randomized, double-blind clinical study. Fifty patients with GERD were randomly assigned to receive dexrabeprazole 10 mg or rabeprazole 20 mg once daily. Efficacy was assessed by evaluating improvement in visual analog scale （VAS） scores of heart-burn and regurgitation and safety was assessed by recording incidence of any adverse drug reactions. Laboratory investigations and upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy was conducted at baseline and after 28 d of therapy.RESULTS： A total of 50 patients （n = 25 in dexrabeprazole group and rabeprazole group each） completed the study. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. The VAS score （mean 4. SD） of heartburn and regurgitation in dexrabeprazole （64.8±5.1 and 64 ± 8.1, respectively） and rabeprazole （64.4 ± 8.7 and 57.6 ± 9.7, respectively） groups significantly reduced （P 〈 0.0001） to 30 ± 11.5, 24 ± 10 and 32 ± 9.5, 29.2±11.9, respectively on d 28. A significantly higher （P = 0.002） proportion of patients showed ≥ 50% improvement in regurgitation with dexrabeprazole 10 mg （96%） compared to rabeprazole 20 mg （60%）. Onset of symptom improvement was significantly earlier with dexrabeprazole than with rabeprazole （1.8 ± 0.8 d vs 2.6 ± 1.4 d; P 〈0.05）. The incidences of esophagitis in the dexrabeprazole group and rabeprazole group before therapy were 84% and 92%, respectively （P = 0.38）. The incidence of improvement/healing of esophagitis after therapy was more （P = 0,036） in the dexrabeprazole group （95.2%） compared to the rabeprazole group （65.2%）. No adverse drug reaction was seen in either group.CONCLUSION： In the treatment of GERD, efficacy of dexrabeprazole 10 mg is better than rabeprazole 20 mg, with regards to improvement/healing of endoscopic lesions and relief from symptoms of regurgitation.
文摘AIM： To investigate if differences exist for patients＇ gastroesophageal reflux as measured by the Bravo ambulatory esophageal pH system between d 1 and d 2.METHODS： A retrospective study of 27 consecutive adult patients who underwent Bravo esophageal pH monitoring was performed. Patients underwent EGD under Ⅳ conscious sedation prior to Bravo placement. Acid reflux variables and symptom scores for d 1 were compared to d 2.RESULTS： The mean doses of fentanyl and midazolam were 90.4 μg and 7.2 mg, respectively. D 1 results were significantly more elevated than d 2 with respect to total time pH 〈 4, upright position reflux, and mean number of long refluxes. No statistical difference was noted between the two days for supine position reflux, number of refluxes, duration of longest reflux, episodes of heartburn, and symptom score.CONCLUSION： Patients undergoing Bravo esophageal pH monitoring in association with EGD and moderate conscious sedation experience significantly more acid reflux on d i compared to d 2. The Ⅳ sedation may be responsible for the increased reflux on d 1. Performed this way, 48-h Bravo results may not be entirely representative of the patients＇ true GE reflux profile.
