Objective-To evaluate the prophylactic effect of ranitidine 150 mg twice daily in patients requiring one of the following non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: naproxen, piroxicam, diclofenac, and indomethacin. In addition, risk factors were studied in order to help in targeting of such treatment to specific groups of patients.Design-Double blind, placebo controlled, randomised, parallel group with endoscopic assessments at 0, 4, and 8 weeks.Setting-Multicentre outpatient study at secondary referral centres in five European countries.Patients-297 patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis over the age of 18 without lesions in the stomach and duodenum at baseline endoscopy (after one week without taking non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs). Those taking other antirheumatic agents, concomitant ulcerogenic drugs, or treatment for peptic ulcers within the previous 30 days were excluded. Age, sex, arthritic disease, and type of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug used were comparable in the two treatment groups. In all, 263 patients completed the trial.Interventions-Ranitidine 150 mg twice daily or placebo (plus the selected non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug) was prescribed within five days after the baseline endoscopy for two consecutive periods of four weeks. Paracetamol was permitted during the study, but not antacids. Patients were withdrawn if the most severe grade of damage (including ulceration) was found at the four week endoscopy or when indicated, or with lesser damage at the investigator's discretion.End point-Frequency of gastric and duodenal ulceration or lesions, or both.Measurements and main results-The cumulative incidence of peptic ulceration by eight weeks was 10-3% (27/263); 2 out of 135 (1-5%) developed duodenal ulceration in the ranitidine group, compared with 10 out of 126 (8%) taking placebo. The frequency ofgastric ulceration was the same (6%) for the two groups at eight weeks. Though significantly fewer gastric lesions developed in the ranitidine group by four weeks, this difference was not evident by eight weeks. The frequency of non-ulcerative lesions in the duodenum did not differ greatly for the two groups at either time point. Twelve out of 75 (16%) patients taking piroxicam developed peptic ulceration, of whom two thirds had duodenal ulceration. Patients with a history of peptic ulcer were particularly susceptible to recurrent ulceration, against which ranitidine offered some protection.Conclusions-Ranitidine 150 mg twice daily significantly reduced the incidence of duodenal ulceration but not gastric ulceration when prescribed concomitantly with one of four commonly used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
Background: Previous studies have demonstrated greater efficacy for omeprazole compared with cimetidine in patients with endoscopically verified oesophagitis, but excluded the substantial group of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients with reflux symptoms but without endoscopic abnormality. This prospective, randomized, double‐blind study compared omeprazole and cimetidine in the treatment of GERD‐associated heartburn both in patients with symptomatic non‐ulcerative oesophagitis and in those with heartburn but without oesophagitis.
Methods: A total of 221 patients with heartburn and oesophageal mucosa grade 0 (normal, n = 51), 1 (no macroscopic erosions, n = 52), 2 (isolated erosions, n = 97) or 3 (confluent erosions, n = 21) were randomized to receive double‐blind either omeprazole 20 mg daily or cimetidine 400 mg q.d.s. for a period of 4 weeks. Those still symptomatic after 4 weeks of treatment received omeprazole 20 mg daily for a further 4 weeks.
Results: There was no correlation between severity of heartburn and endoscopic grade at entry (correlation coefficient = 0.196). After 4 weeks of treatment, the proportion of patients in whom heartburn was controlled (no more than mild symptoms on no more than 1 day in the previous 7) on omeprazole (66%; 74/112) was more than double that on cimetidine (31%; 34/109) (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between the relief of heartburn in the 47% of patients without unequivocal oesophagitis (endoscopic grade 0 or 1) and in the 53% of patients with erosive oesophagitis (grade 2 or 3) (P = 0.31). Only treatment with omeprazole (P < 0.0001) and lower severity of heartburn at entry (P < 0.01) were significant in predicting heartburn relief. Amongst those patients requiring an additional 4 weeks of treatment with omeprazole, 67% (54/81) reported that their heartburn was controlled after 8 weeks of treatment.
Conclusion: We conclude that omeprazole is superior to cimetidine for the relief of all grades of heartburn in GERD, whether or not the patient has unequivocal endoscopic oesophagitis.
To assess the effect of 4 weeks' therapy with ranitidine 150 mg twice daily on the healing of symptomatic NSAID-associated gastric and duodenal ulcers, 149 arthritic patients were randomly allocated to one of three treatment groups: ranitidine with NSAID continued, ranitidine with NSAID discontinued, and placebo with NSAID discontinued. The healing frequency in patients with gastric ulceration was 67, 68 and 47%, and in those with duodenal ulceration 61, 81 and 42%, respectively. Only the difference between the duodenal ulcer healing rates for ranitidine with NSAID discontinued and placebo was statistically significant (P = 0.02). Healing rates were uninfluenced by gender, age, smoking habits, alcohol consumption, ulcer frequency or size, arthritic disease, or participating country.
OAM eradicates H. pylori in significantly more patients than OA, but successful H. pylori eradication with either OAM or OA predisposes to low endoscopic and symptomatic relapse rates for duodenal ulcer patients when followed up for 12 months.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.