Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 99(8): 1437-41, 2004 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15307856

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this article is to determine the severity of esophagitis and the response to treatment with proton-pump inhibitors in patients with and without evidence of Helicobacter pylori infection. METHODS: This retrospective analysis evaluated data collected in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial that assessed the efficacy and safety of once-daily esomeprazole 40 mg (n = 2,624) versus lansoprazole 30 mg (n = 2,617) for up to 8 wk in the treatment of reflux-associated erosive esophagitis. At baseline, erosive esophagitis was graded using the Los Angeles (LA) classification; serologic testing for H. pylori was performed using a FlexSure HP serum test. RESULTS: There were 14.7% of patients who were seropositive for H. pylori. The percentages of seropositive and seronegative patients with each grade of esophagitis were: LA grade A, 38%, 36%; LA grade B, 41%, 39%; LA grade C, 16%, 19%; and LA grade D, 5%, 6%, respectively. Severe heartburn was present at baseline in 42% of H. pylori-positive and 42% of H. pylori-negative patients. Life-table healing rates with esomeprazole were not influenced by H. pylori status (seropositive 92.6% (95% confidence interval: 89.8-95.4); seronegative 92.6% (95% confidence interval: 91.4-93.7)). The rates with esomeprazole were significantly higher than those with lansoprazole (seropositive 90.5% (95% confidence interval: 87.5-93.5); seronegative 88.5% (95% confidence interval: 87.1-89.8)) after adjusting for baseline H. pylori status (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The severity of erosive esophagitis at baseline was similar regardless of H. pylori seropositivity. Healing rates were not influenced by H. pylori status.


Assuntos
Esomeprazol/análogos & derivados , Esomeprazol/uso terapêutico , Esofagite/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Helicobacter/complicações , Helicobacter pylori , Inibidores da Bomba de Prótons , 2-Piridinilmetilsulfinilbenzimidazóis , Adulto , Idoso , Inibidores Enzimáticos/uso terapêutico , Esofagite/microbiologia , Esofagite/patologia , Feminino , Infecções por Helicobacter/diagnóstico , Humanos , Lansoprazol , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Testes Sorológicos
2.
J Periodontol ; 74(4): 411-9, 2003 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12747444

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Periodontal regeneration success may be limited by placing bone grafts and membranes in infected sites. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that adjunctive subgingival administration of chlorhexidine gelatin bioresorbable chips enhances bone gain when used in conjunction with guided tissue regeneration. METHODS: This was a single center, blinded, 2-arm parallel design study of 44 subjects with one or more sites with probing depth and clinical attachment loss > or = 5 mm following initial therapy and radiographic evidence of bone loss. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either chlorhexidine (CHX) chip or sham chip placement one week prior to regenerative therapy that included graft placement and site coverage with guided tissue membranes. Patients also received CHX or sham chip placement, per their randomization, adjunctively to scaling and root planing or maintenance procedures. Periodontal examinations were completed at baseline (8 weeks prior to surgery); 1 week prior to surgery; and at 3, 6, and 9 months postsurgery. The major outcomes for the study were changes in bone height and bone mass as measured from standardized radiographs used for quantitative digital subtraction radiography over the 11-month study period. RESULTS: Subjects receiving sham chip placement gained a mean bone height of 1.49 +/- 0.22 mm, while patients receiving the CHX chips gained significantly more bone height (3.54 +/- 0.45 mm; P<0.001). Similarly, subjects receiving CHX chips as an adjunct gained significantly more bone mass (5.57 +/- 0.69 mg; P<0.001) than the standard therapy (2.59 +/- 0.34 mg). CONCLUSIONS: These pilot results indicate that locally delivered, controlled-release antimicrobial treatment may improve the amount of bone gain during guided tissue regeneration procedures. These data support the evidence that infection control is an important variable in successful regeneration.


Assuntos
Perda do Osso Alveolar/tratamento farmacológico , Anti-Infecciosos Locais/uso terapêutico , Regeneração Óssea/efeitos dos fármacos , Clorexidina/análogos & derivados , Clorexidina/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Idoso , Perda do Osso Alveolar/cirurgia , Análise de Variância , Anti-Infecciosos Locais/administração & dosagem , Transplante Ósseo , Clorexidina/administração & dosagem , Preparações de Ação Retardada/administração & dosagem , Preparações de Ação Retardada/uso terapêutico , Raspagem Dentária , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Defeitos da Furca/tratamento farmacológico , Defeitos da Furca/cirurgia , Regeneração Tecidual Guiada Periodontal , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Razão de Chances , Perda da Inserção Periodontal/tratamento farmacológico , Perda da Inserção Periodontal/cirurgia , Projetos Piloto , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...