1
|
Chatterjee D, Gavas R, Saha SK. Detection of mental stress using novel spatio-temporal distribution of brain activations. Biomed Signal Process Control 2023. [DOI: 10.1016/j.bspc.2022.104526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
|
2
|
Haastrup PF, Jarbøl DE, Thompson W, Hansen JM, Søndergaard J, Rasmussen S. When does proton pump inhibitor treatment become long term? A scoping review. BMJ Open Gastroenterol 2021; 8:bmjgast-2020-000563. [PMID: 33589415 PMCID: PMC7887363 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2020-000563] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2020] [Revised: 01/18/2021] [Accepted: 01/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use has risen substantially, primarily driven by ongoing use over months to years. However, there is no consensus on how to define long-term PPI use. Our objectives were to review and compare definitions of long-term PPI use in existing literature and describe the rationale for each definition. Moreover, we aimed to suggest generally applicable definitions for research and clinical use. Design The databases PubMed and Cochrane Library were searched for publications concerning long-term use of PPIs and ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for registered studies. Two reviewers independently screened the titles, abstracts, and full texts in two series and subsequently extracted data. Results A total of 742 studies were identified, and 59 met the eligibility criteria. In addition, two ongoing studies were identified. The definition of long-term PPI use varied from >2 weeks to >7 years. The most common definition was ≥1 year or ≥6 months. A total of 12/61 (20%) of the studies rationalised their definition. Conclusion The definitions of long-term PPI treatment varied substantially between studies and were seldom rationalised. In a clinical context, use of PPI for more than 8 weeks could be a reasonable definition of long-term use in patients with reflux symptoms and more than 4 weeks in patients with dyspepsia or peptic ulcer. For research purposes, 6 months could be a possible definition in pharmacoepidemiological studies, whereas studies of adverse effects may require a tailored definition depending on the necessary exposure time. We recommend to always rationalise the choice of definition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Fentz Haastrup
- Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Dorte Ejg Jarbøl
- Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Wade Thompson
- Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Jane Møller Hansen
- Department of Medical Gastroenterology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Jens Søndergaard
- Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Sanne Rasmussen
- Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hsu PI, Lu CL, Wu DC, Kuo CH, Kao SS, Chang CC, Tai WC, Lai KH, Chen WC, Wang HM, Cheng JS, Tsai TJ, Chuah SK. Eight weeks of esomeprazole therapy reduces symptom relapse, compared with 4 weeks, in patients with Los Angeles grade A or B erosive esophagitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 13:859-66.e1. [PMID: 25245625 DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.09.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2014] [Revised: 09/06/2014] [Accepted: 09/08/2014] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS There is disagreement over the ideal duration of initial proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for gastroesophageal reflux disease, and whether prolonged therapy increases healing of the esophagitis and prevents symptom relapse. We performed a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled study to compare the efficacies of 4 weeks vs 8 weeks of PPI therapy in reducing reflux symptoms and preventing symptom relapse in patients with Los Angeles grade A or B erosive esophagitis. METHODS Consecutive patients with symptomatic Los Angeles grade A or B erosive esophagitis were assigned randomly to groups given daily esomeprazole (40 mg) for 4 weeks (n = 207) or 8 weeks (n = 201) as their initial treatment. Patients with complete symptom resolution were switched to on-demand therapy until the end of week 20. All patients underwent follow-up endoscopy at the end of week 20. Symptom relapse was defined as 2 or more episodes of troublesome reflux symptoms per week or ingestion of PPI for more than 7 days within 4 weeks, owing to reflux symptoms. RESULTS The 4-week and 8-week groups had comparable rates of complete symptom resolution (77.9% vs 82.1%). However, the cumulative 12-week incidence of symptom relapse was higher for the 4-week group than for the 8-week group (62.5% vs 47.8%; difference, 14.7%; 95% confidence interval, 3.7%-25.7%; P = .009). No significant difference was observed between groups in the proportions of patients with sustained healing at the end of week 20 (49.6% vs 40.9%; P = .160). CONCLUSIONS Prolonging PPI therapy from 4 weeks to 8 weeks does not appear to increase the rate of complete symptom resolution in patients with mild erosive esophagitis. However, 8 weeks of PPI therapy reduces symptom relapse, compared with 4 weeks, in patients with Los Angeles grade A or B erosive esophagitis. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01874535.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ping-I Hsu
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, National Yang-Ming University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Ching-Liang Lu
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Deng-Chyang Wu
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Chao-Hung Kuo
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Sung-Shuo Kao
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, National Yang-Ming University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Chun-Chao Chang
- Department of Medicine, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Wei-Chen Tai
- Division of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Kwok-Hung Lai
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, National Yang-Ming University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Wen-Chih Chen
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, National Yang-Ming University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Huay-Min Wang
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, National Yang-Ming University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Jin-Shiung Cheng
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, National Yang-Ming University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Tzung-Jiun Tsai
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, National Yang-Ming University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Seng-Kee Chuah
- Division of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
| |
Collapse
|