Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25537303›Full record

Trial reportJournal of veterinary internal medicine2015

Evaluation of the effect of orally administered acid suppressants on intragastric pH in cats.

S Parkinson, K Tolbert, K Messenger, A Odunayo, M Brand, G Davidson, E Peters, A Reed, M G Papich

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

S ParkinsonDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, TN.
K Tolbert
K Messenger
A Odunayo
M Brand
G Davidson
E Peters
A Reed
M G Papich
University of Tennessee at Knoxville · USNorth Carolina State University · USGlaxoSmithKline (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcid suppressant drugs are a mainstay of treatment for cats with gastrointestinal erosion and ulceration. However, clinical studies have not been performed to compare the efficacy of commonly PO administered acid suppressants in cats. HYPOTHESIS/

objectivesTo compare the effect of PO administered famotidine, fractionated omeprazole tablet (fOT), and omeprazole reformulated paste (ORP) on intragastric pH in cats. We hypothesized that both omeprazole formulations would be superior to famotidine and placebo. ANIMALS: Six healthy adult DSH colony cats.

methodsUtilizing a randomized, 4-way crossover design, cats received 0.88-1.26 mg/kg PO q12h fOT, ORP, famotidine, and placebo (lactose capsules). Intragastric pH monitoring was used to continuously record intragastric pH for 96 hours beginning on day 4 of treatment. Plasma omeprazole concentrations at steady state (day 7) were determined by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with ultraviolet detection. Mean percentage time that intragastric pH was ≥ 3 and ≥ 4 were compared among groups using ANOVA with a posthoc Tukey-Kramer test (α = 0.05).

resultsThe mean percentage time ± SD that intragastric pH was ≥ 3 was 68.4 ± 35.0% for fOT, 73.9 ± 23.2% for ORP, 42.8 ± 18.6% for famotidine, and 16.0 ± 14.2% for placebo. Mean ± SD plasma omeprazole concentrations were similar in cats receiving fOT compared to those receiving ORP and in a range associated with acid suppression reported in other studies. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: These results suggest that both omeprazole formulations provide superior acid suppression in cats compared to famotidine or placebo. Fractionated enteric-coated OT is an effective acid suppressant despite disruption of the enteric coating.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntacidsAnti-Ulcer AgentsArea Under CurveCatsCross-Over StudiesFamotidineHalf-LifeHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationMonitoring, PhysiologicOintmentsOmeprazoleStomachTabletsAntacidsAnti-Ulcer AgentsFamotidineOintmentsOmeprazoleTabletsBravo monitoringFamotidineFelineOmeprazole

Identifiers

PMID25537303
PMCPMC4858072
OpenAlexW2114764267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.