RESUMEN
Background/Aims@#The mucoprotective drug rebamipide is used to treat gastritis and peptic ulcers. We compared the efficacy of Mucosta Ⓡ (rebamipide 100 mg) and its new formulation, AD-203 (rebamipide 150 mg), in treating erosive gastritis. @*Methods@#This double-blind, active control, noninferiority, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial randomly assigned 475 patients with endoscopically proven erosive gastritis to two groups: AD-203 twice daily or Mucosta Ⓡ thrice daily for 2 weeks. The intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis included 454 patients (AD-203, n=229; Mucosta Ⓡ , n=225), and the per-protocol (PP) analysis included 439 patients (AD-203, n=224; Mucosta Ⓡ , n=215). The posttreatment assessments included the primary (erosion improvement rate) and secondary endpoints (erosion and edema cure rates; improvement rates of redness, hemorrhage, and gastrointestinal symptoms). Drug-related adverse events were evaluated. @*Results@#According to the ITT analysis, the erosion improvement rates (posttreatment) in AD-203-treated and Mucosta Ⓡ -treated patients were 39.7% and 43.8%, respectively. According to the PP analysis, the erosion improvement rates (posttreatment) in AD-203-treated and Mucosta Ⓡ -treated patients were 39.3% and 43.7%, respectively. The one-sided 97.5% lower limit for the improvement rate difference between the study groups was −4.01% (95% confidence interval [CI], –13.09% to 5.06%) in the ITT analysis and −4.44% (95% CI, –13.65% to 4.78%) in the PP analysis. The groups did not significantly differ in the secondary endpoints in either analysis. Twenty-four AD-203-treated and 20 Mucosta Ⓡ -treated patients reported adverse events but no serious adverse drug reactions; both groups presented similar adverse event rates. @*Conclusions@#The new formulation of rebamipide 150 mg (AD-203) twice daily was not inferior to rebamipide 100 mg (Mucosta Ⓡ ) thrice daily. Both formulations showed a similar efficacy in treating erosive gastritis.
RESUMEN
Background/Aims@#The proper handling of antithrombotics is critical, and this study aimed to assess guideline adherence in the management of antithrombotics before and after endoscopy. @*Methods@#A survey questionnaire was developed. The respondents’ demographic information was included, and the questionnaire was divided into the first section for forceps biopsy, the second for polypectomy, and the third for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in which aspirin, clopidogrel, combination therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel), warfarin, and direct oral anticoagulants (apixaban) were prescribed to imaginary patients. @*Results@#A total of 415 endoscopists completed this survey (response rate of 6.2%, 415/6,673). The percentage of respondents who chose to proceed with biopsy for patients taking aspirin, those taking clopidogrel, those under combination therapy, those taking warfarin, and those taking apixaban was 89.4%, 74.2%, 61.0%, 38.6%, and 50.4%, respectively. Most respondents answered that they would discontinue aspirin, clopidogrel, and a combination of both drugs for 5 days before polypectomy or ESD (69.4%/76.9%, 83.6%/83.9%, and 53.3%/65.8%, respectively). The answers indicated that warfarin should be discontinued with heparin bridge therapy in high thromboembolic risk patients (polypectomy 70.1%, ESD 73.5%). Regarding apixaban use in polypectomy and ESD, 63.9% and 58.1% of respondents, respectively, chose answers consistent with the guidelines. @*Conclusions@#The gap between the guidelines and clinical practice in the management of antithrombotics before and after endoscopy is considerable and should be addressed via educational strategies.