ArticleHippokratia
Difference in efficacy of proton pump inhibitor between new-onset and recurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease: Result from a study of on-demand versus continuous maintenance therapy in Japan.
Article in Hippokratia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Approaches to Deprescribing Proton Pump Inhibitors in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Is It Time for Noncontinuous Therapy for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease?Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND-
objectiveNo study has focused on the difference in efficacy of maintenance therapy between patients with new-onset and recurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of this study is to reveal this point.
methodsEndoscopically proven GERD patients who had completed 8-week initial therapy were sequentially randomized to continuous arm (Omeprazole 20mg od) or on-demand arm (Omeprazole 20mg on-demand). Patients filled in daily symptoms and tablet usages for 24 weeks. Patients underwent upper GI endoscopy at 24 weeks. Symptom relief was defined as no symptoms for>6 days during a week. The numbers of patients who achieved symptom relief and mucosal healing were compared between the new-onset and recurrent groups in the continuous arm and in the on-demand arm, respectively.
resultsAmong new-onset GERD [n=82 (continuous: 42 patients, on-demand: 40)], continuous arm achieved significant symptom-relief than in on-demand arm at 4*,5*,6** and 17*week. Among recurrent GERD [n=36(continuous: 17 patients, on-demand: 19)], continuous arm achieved significant symptom-relief at 1**,2*,3*,4*,5**,7**,8**,17* and 18* week, respectively (*<0.05,**<0.01). The number of healed patients was significantly higher in new-onset group (60/68, 88.2%) than in recurrent group (17/30, 56.7%) (<0.01).
conclusionSince therapeutic response during maintenance therapy was poor in recurrent GERD, continuous therapy is recommended in order to maintain symptom-relief and mucosal healing. Hippokratia 2015, 19 (1): 53-56.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26435648PMC4574588W2417279878What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.