Proton pump inhibitors versus H-2-antagonists: a meta-anaiysis of their efficacy in treating bleeding peptic ulcer

Citation
Jp. Gisbert et al., Proton pump inhibitors versus H-2-antagonists: a meta-anaiysis of their efficacy in treating bleeding peptic ulcer, ALIM PHARM, 15(7), 2001, pp. 917-926
Citations number
51
Language
INGLESE
art.tipo
Article
Categorie Soggetti
Pharmacology,"da verificare
Journal title
ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
ISSN journal
0269-2813 → ACNP
Volume
15
Issue
7
Year of publication
2001
Pages
917 - 926
Database
ISI
SICI code
0269-2813(200107)15:7<917:PPIVHA>2.0.ZU;2-L
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate whether proton pump inhibitors are more effective than H-2-antagonists (H-2-A) for the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer. Data sources: PubMed database until January 2000. Study selection: Comparat ive randomized trials of proton pump inhibitors (omeprazole, lansoprazole, or pantoprazole) vs. H-2-A (cimetidine, ranitidine or famotidine). Data extraction: Meta-analysis combining the odds ratios (OR) of the indivi dual studies in a global OR (Peto method). Outcomes evaluated: Persistent or recurrent bleeding, need for surgery, or mortality. Data synthesis: Eleven studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and contain ed data for at least one of the planned comparisons. Persistent or recurren t bleeding was reported in 6.7% (95% CI: 4.9-8.6%) of the patients treated with proton pump inhibitors, and in 13.4% (95% CI: 10.8-16%) of those treat ed with H2-A (OR 0.4; 95% CI: 0.27-0.59) (chi (2)-homogeneity test, 18; P = 0.09). Surgery was needed in 5.2% (95% CI: 3.4-6.9%) of the patients treat ed with proton pump inhibitors, and in 6.9% (95% CI: 4.9-8.9%) of the patie nts treated with H-2-A (OR 0.7; 95% CI: 0.43-1.13), Respective percentages for mortality were 1.6% (95% CI: 0.9-2.9%) and 2.2% (95% CI: 1.3-3.7%) (OR 0.69; 95% CI: 0.31-1.57). Sub-analysis: Five studies evaluated the effect of both therapies given in bolus injections on persistent or recurrent bleeding rate, which was 6% (95 % CI: 3.6-8.3%) and 8.1% (95% CI: 5.3-10.9%), respectively (OR, 0.57; 95% C I: 0.31-1.05). Persistent or recurrent bleeding in high risk patients (Forr est Ia, Ib and IIa) occurred in 13.2% (95% CI: 7.9-8%) of the patients trea ted with proton pump inhibitors and in 34.5% (27-42%) of those treated with H-2-A (OR 0.28; 95% CT: 0.16-0.48), In patients not having endoscopic ther apy, persistent or recurrent bleeding was reported, respectively, in 4.3% ( 95% CI: 2.7-6.7%) and in 12% (95% CI: 8.7-15%) (OR 0.24; 95% CI: 0.13-0.43) . Less marked differences were observed in patients having adjunct endoscop ic therapy: 10.3% (95% CI: 6.7-13.8%) and 15.2% (11.1-19.3%) (OR 0.59; 95% CI: 0.36-0.97). Moreover, the significance disappeared in this group when a single outlier study was excluded. Conclusions: Proton pump inhibitors are more effective than H-2-A in preven ting persistent or recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer, although this adva ntage seems to be more evident in patients not having adjunct sclerosis the rapy. This beneficial effect seems to be similar or even more marked in pat ients with Forrest Ia, Ib or IIa ulcers. However, proton pump inhibitors ar e not more effective than H-2-A for reducing surgery or mortality rates. Ne vertheless, the data are too scarce and heterogeneous to draw definitive co nclusions, and further comparative trials are clearly warranted.