Efficacy and safety of esomeprazole compared with omeprazole in GERD patients with erosive esophagitis: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), esomeprazole, the S-isomer of omeprazole, has demonstrated pharmacological and clinical benefits beyond those seen with the racemic parent compound. This study was designed to further evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of esomeprazole relative to that of omeprazole in healing erosive esophagitis and resolving accompanying symptoms of GERD. METHODS: Esomeprazole 40 mg was compared with omeprazole 20 mg once daily in 2425 patients with erosive esophagitis (Helicobacter pylori negative by serology) in an 8-wk, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study conducted in 163 centers throughout the US. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with healed esophagitis at wk 8. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients healed at wk 4, resolution of heartburn at wk 4, time to first resolution and sustained resolution of heartburn, and proportion of heartburn-free days and nights. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: Significantly more patients were healed with esomeprazole versus omeprazole at wk 8 (93.7% vs 84.2%, p < 0.001; life table estimates, intention-to-treat analysis). Healing rates at wk 4 were 81.7% and 68.7%, respectively. Esomeprazole was superior to omeprazole for all secondary measures and had a similar safety profile. The most common adverse events in both treatment groups were headache, diarrhea, and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole demonstrates significantly greater efficacy than omeprazole in the treatment of GERD patients with erosive esophagitis. The tolerability and safety of esomeprazole are comparable to that of omeprazole. (Am

Rabeprazole is superior to ranitidine in the management of active duodenal ulcer disease: results of a double-blind, randomized North American study.

OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of rabeprazole versus ranitidine in the treatment of patients with active duodenal ulcer disease. METHODS: This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study enrolled 376 patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive rabeprazole 20 mg administered once daily in the morning (q.a.m.) with matching ranitidine placebo twice daily (b.i.d.) (n = 188), or ranitidine 150 mg b.i.d. with matching rabeprazole placebo q.a.m. (n = 188). Three visits were scheduled: wk 0 (baseline; days -3 to -1), wk 2 (day 15+/-3 days), and wk 4 (day 29+/-3 days). The primary efficacy response variable was defined as complete regeneration of the mucosa at the site of all ulcers identified during the study. Secondary efficacy variables included patients' ratings of frequency and severity of ulcer pain, frequency of antacid use, and improvement of overall physical well-being. Tolerability was evaluated with analyses of adverse events, laboratory evaluations, fasting serum gastrin levels, vital signs, body weight, and electrocardiograms. RESULTS: Up to 4 wk of treatment with rabeprazole 20 mg q.a.m. produced significantly greater healing rates, compared to treatment with ranitidine 150 mg b.i.d. (83% vs 73%; p = 0.017). Significant differences between treatment groups were also observed for secondary efficacy indices. At wk 2, rabeprazole was more likely than ranitidine to produce complete resolution of duodenal ulcer pain (39% vs 25%; p = 0.006), improvement in duodenal ulcer nighttime pain severity (76% vs 65%; p = 0.044), and improvement in overall well-being (55% vs 41%; p = 0.009). At wk 4, the proportion of patients with normalization of overall well-being was significantly higher in the rabeprazole group than in the ranitidine group (45% vs 29%; p = 0.003). Rabeprazole was safe and well tolerated in this study. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with active duodenal ulcer disease, rabeprazole 20 mg q.a.m. is superior to ranitidine 150 mg b.i.d. in healing, resolving ulcer pain frequency, improving nighttime pain severity, and improving overall well-being. Rabeprazole is an effective and well-tolerated alternative treatment for patients with active duodenal ulcer disease.

An alternative non-macrolide, non-imidazole treatment regimen for curing Helicobacter pylori and duodenal ulcers: ranitidine bismuth citrate plus amoxicillin. The RBC H. pylori Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Because patients who fail to be cured of H. pylori infection following macrolide or imidazole therapy are difficult to treat, there is a clear need for a reasonably effective and simple second-line treatment regimen. The purpose of these two studies was to evaluate the efficacy of ranitidine bismuth citrate (RBC) plus amoxicillin for the cure of H. pylori infection and for healing duodenal ulcers and preventing ulcer relapse. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two identically designed randomized, double-blind, double-dummy studies were conducted in patients with an H. pylori-associated duodenal ulcer. Patients were treated with either RBC 400 mg bid for 4 weeks plus amoxicillin 500 mg qid for 2 weeks, RBC 400 mg bid for 4 weeks and placebo qid for 2 weeks, placebo bid for 4 weeks and amoxicillin 500 mg qid for 2 weeks, or placebo bid for 4 weeks and placebo qid for 2 weeks. Patients with healed ulcers after 4 weeks of treatment were eligible for entry into a 24-week observation phase for the assessment of H. pylori status (culture, histology, and CLOtest) and ulcer relapse. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients with confirmed H. pylori infection at baseline were evaluated. Of these, 132 whose ulcers had healed entered the 24-week posttreatment observation phase. The combination of RBC plus amoxicillin resulted in higher H. pylori cure rates (55%) and higher duodenal ulcer healing (74%) than did either treatment alone. All treatment were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ranitidine bismuth citrate plus amoxicillin cures H. pylori infection in more than half of the patients treated. This treatment regimen shows promise as the basis for future non-macrolide, non-imidazole triple therapy regimens for curing H. pylori infection. Such regimens may be appropriate second-line treatment for patients who are resistant to or who are unable to tolerate macrolide- or imidazole-containing therapies.

Filiform polyposis of the colon presenting as massive hemorrhage: an uncommon complication of Crohn's disease.

A case of localized filiform polyposis of the colon is presented. This lesion was part of a more generalized inflammatory bowel disease with clinicopathological features indicative of Crohn's disease. An unusual feature of this case was profuse rectal bleeding, initially from a solitary sigmoid ulcer and later from the area of filiform polyposis. A step by step clinicopathological follow-up emphasizing the development of filiform polyps is provided.

Segmental tuberculosis of the colon diagnosed by colonoscopy.

Segmental tuberculosis of the colon is a rare clinical entity. In the absence of pulmonary or ileocecal involvement, colonic tuberculosis may be difficult to differentiate from neoplasm or Crohn's disease by symptomatic and radiological means. Colonoscopy and biopsy can, however, establish the diagnosis and prevent operative intervention, as indicated in the present report. A patient with a radiologically demonstrated strictured lesion of the sigmoid colon was found at colonoscopy to have several hemorrhagic transverse ulcers ranging in diameter between 1-4.5 cm. Multiple target colonoscopic biopsies, specifically from the ulcer beds, revealed necrotizing granulomas and acid-fast bacilli. Antituberculous chemotherapy produced remarkable symptomatic, radiographic and endoscopic improvements and averted exploratory laparotomy for the establishment of the diagnosis. This case report points out the importance of colonoscopic biopsy as a useful diagnostic modality in this disease.