Meta-analysis used to identify factors associated with the effectiveness of proton pump inhibitors against non-erosive reflux disease

Therapeutic effect of laparoscopic fundoplication for patients with GERD from the viewpoint of Lyon Consensus

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Lyon Consensus was conducted in 2017, leading to a revision of the diagnostic criteria of GERD. Conclusive GERD was defined as cases in which the distal esophageal acid exposure time (AET) is greater than 6% and there exists either peptic esophagitis, constriction, or long-segment Barrett's mucosa with a Los Angeles classification of grade C or D. Borderline GERD is defined as cases in which AET is between 4 and 6% and there exists peptic esophagitis with a Los Angeles classification of either grade A or B. All other cases were defined as Inconclusive GERD. We conducted a retrospective investigation of the treatment results of laparoscopic fundoplication (LF) for GERD according to the Lyon Consensus and evaluated whether or not it is an effective treatment predictor.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From among the cases of primary LF conducted on patients with GERD-related illnesses at our university hospital from June 2008 to March 2020, the subjects included 215 individuals who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and 24 h multichannel intraluminal impedance pH (MII-pH) testing prior to surgery. We compared the pathophysiology of the Conclusive GERD Group (Group A), Borderline GERD Group (Group B), and Inconclusive GERD Group (Group C), and then investigated the treatment results of each group. We used AFP classification for pathophysiological evaluation. For the acid reflux evaluation, we conducted MII-pH measurements using Sleuth, manufactured by Sandhill. The postoperative evaluation period was set to 3 months following surgery. The data are expressed using median values, with a statistical significance defined as p < 0.05 using the Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney, Wilcoxon signed-rank, and Chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Group A: 92 cases (43%, male 69 cases, age 57), Group B: 48 cases (22%, male 20 cases, age 52), and Group C: 75 cases (35%, male 69 cases, age 57). Regarding the patient backgrounds, while there were no significant differences in terms of gender or disease duration, those in Group A were significantly older than the other two groups, and there was a significant difference in Body Mass Index (BMI) between Group A and Group C. The results of each factor were: A factor (1 vs.1 vs. 1, p < 0.001), F factor (2 vs. 0 vs. 0, p < 0.001), and P factor (2 vs. 1 vs. 0, p < 0.001), with AET of 10.0 vs. 2.9 vs. 0.6, p < 0.001, and the disease had progressed more in Group A. There were also no differences in terms of surgical methods, hemorrhage volume, and intraoperative/postoperative complications; however, the use of mesh was higher and surgery duration was longer in Group A. There were obvious improvements in the A, F, and P factors and AET of each group following surgery (other than F and P of Group C, p < 0.001). The rate of recurrence was 15% in Group A, 8% in Group B, and 6% in Group C. It tended to be higher in Group A, but this was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The classification of GERD pathophysiology based on the Lyon Consensus is satisfactory, with no significant differences in the rate of effect of LF. The Lyon Consensus is effective for ascertaining the severity and pathophysiology of GERD; however, we were unable to forecast the treatment results of LF.

Vonoprazan treatment improves gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease

The effects of vonoprazan, a new potassium-competitive acid blocker, on gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptom are not fully elucidated. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of vonoprazan on GERD and associated gastrointestinal symptoms. We retrospectively reviewed 88 Helicobacter pylori negative patients with GERD treated with vonoprazan 10 mg daily. Symptoms were evaluated using the Izumo scale, which reflects quality of life related to various abdominal symptoms. The rates of improvement and resolution of GERD symptoms were 86% (76/88) and 57% (50/88), respectively. Improvement and resolution in patients with erosive esophagitis was higher than in those with non-erosive reflux disease (91% vs 83%, p = 0.260 and 71% vs 47%, p = 0.025, respectively). We attempted to identify factors which predict the effects of vonoprazan. Multivariate analysis identified advanced age (≥60-year-old) (odds ratio [OR] 7.281, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.056-25.776, p = 0.002), obesity (BMI ≥ 24) (OR 3.342, 95%CI 1.124-9.940, p = 0.030) and erosive esophagitis (OR 4.368, 95%CI 1.281-14.895, p = 0.018) as positive predictors of resolution of GERD symptoms. Alcohol use (OR 0.131, 95%CI 0.027-0.632, p = 0.011) and history of H. pylori eradication (OR 0.171, 95%CI 0.041-0.718, p = 0.015) were identified as negative predictors. Vonoprazan also improved epigastric pain (73%), postprandial distress (60%), constipation (58%) and diarrhea (52%) in patients with GERD. In conclusion, vonoprazan 10 mg daily is effective in improving GERD symptoms. Advanced age, obesity, erosive esophagitis, alcohol use and history of H. pylori eradication influence the resolution of GERD symptoms. Treatment with vonoprazan favorably affects gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with GERD.

Addition of prokinetics to PPI therapy in gastroesophageal reflux disease: A meta-analysis

AIM: To investigate the efficacy of adding prokinetics to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge databases (prior to October 2013) were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared therapeutic efficacy of PPI alone (single therapy) or PPI plus prokinetics (combined therapy) for GERD. The primary outcome of those selected trials was complete or partial relief of non-erosive reflux disease symptoms or mucosal healing in erosive reflux esophagitis. Using the test of heterogeneity, we established a fixed or random effects model where the risk ratio was the primary readout for measuring efficacy.

RESULTS: Twelve RCTs including 2403 patients in total were enrolled in this study. Combined therapy was not associated with significant relief of symptoms or alterations in endoscopic response relative to single therapy (95%CI: 1.0-1.2, P = 0.05; 95%CI: 0.66-2.61, P = 0.44). However, combined therapy was associated with a greater symptom score change (95%CI: 2.14-3.02, P < 0.00001). Although there was a reduction in the number of reflux episodes in GERD [95%CI: -5.96-(-1.78), P = 0.0003] with the combined therapy, there was no significant effect on acid exposure time (95%CI: -0.37-0.60, P = 0.65). The proportion of patients with adverse effects undergoing combined therapy was significantly higher than for PPI therapy alone (95%CI: 1.06-1.36, P = 0.005) when the difference between 5-HT receptor agonist and PPI combined therapy and single therapy (95%CI: 0.84-1.39, P = 0.53) was excluded.

CONCLUSION: Combined therapy may partially improve patient quality of life, but has no significant effect on symptom or endoscopic response of GERD.

Addition of prokinetics to PPI therapy in gastroesophageal reflux disease: a meta-analysis

AIM

To investigate the efficacy of adding prokinetics to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge databases (prior to October 2013) were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared therapeutic efficacy of PPI alone (single therapy) or PPI plus prokinetics (combined therapy) for GERD. The primary outcome of those selected trials was complete or partial relief of non-erosive reflux disease symptoms or mucosal healing in erosive reflux esophagitis. Using the test of heterogeneity, we established a fixed or random effects model where the risk ratio was the primary readout for measuring efficacy.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs including 2403 patients in total were enrolled in this study. Combined therapy was not associated with significant relief of symptoms or alterations in endoscopic response relative to single therapy (95%CI: 1.0-1.2, P = 0.05; 95%CI: 0.66-2.61, P = 0.44). However, combined therapy was associated with a greater symptom score change (95%CI: 2.14-3.02, P < 0.00001). Although there was a reduction in the number of reflux episodes in GERD [95%CI: -5.96-(-1.78), P = 0.0003] with the combined therapy, there was no significant effect on acid exposure time (95%CI: -0.37-0.60, P = 0.65). The proportion of patients with adverse effects undergoing combined therapy was significantly higher than for PPI therapy alone (95%CI: 1.06-1.36, P = 0.005) when the difference between 5-HT receptor agonist and PPI combined therapy and single therapy (95%CI: 0.84-1.39, P = 0.53) was excluded.

CONCLUSION

Combined therapy may partially improve patient quality of life, but has no significant effect on symptom or endoscopic response of GERD.

Proton pump inhibitor for non-erosive reflux disease: A meta-analysis

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and influential factors of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment for non-erosive reflux disease (NERD).

METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched up to April 2013 to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that probed into the efficacy, safety and influential factors of PPI treatment for NERD. The rates of symptomatic relief and adverse events were measured as the outcomes. After RCT selection, assessment and data collection, the pooled RRs and 95%CI were calculated. This meta-analysis was performed using the Stata 12.0 software (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, United States). The level of evidence was estimated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.

RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs including 6072 patients met the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis showed that PPI treatment was significantly superior to H₂ receptor antagonists (H₂RA) treatment (RR = 1.629, 95%CI: 1.422-1.867, P = 0.000) and placebo (RR = 1.903, 95%CI: 1.573-2.302, P = 0.000) for the symptomatic relief of NERD. However, there were no obvious differences between PPI and H₂RA (RR = 0.928, 95%CI: 0.776-1.110, P = 0.414) or PPI and the placebo (RR = 1.000, 95%CI: 0.896-1.116, P = 0.997) regarding the rate of adverse events. The overall rate of symptomatic relief of PPI against NERD was 51.4% (95%CI: 0.433-0.595, P = 0.000), and relief was influenced by hiatal hernia (P = 0.030). The adverse rate of PPI against NERD was 21.0% (95%CI: 0.152-0.208, P = 0.000), and was affected by hiatal hernia (P = 0.081) and drinking (P = 0.053).

CONCLUSION: PPI overmatched H₂RA on symptomatic relief rate but not on adverse rate for NERD. Its relief rate and adverse rate were influenced by hiatal hernia and drinking.

Indirect comparison of randomised controlled trials: comparative efficacy of dexlansoprazole vs. esomeprazole in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

BACKGROUND

Dexlansoprazole is a new proton pump inhibitor (PPI) with a dual delayed-release system. Both dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole are an enantiomer of lansoprazole and omeprazole respectively. However, there is no head-to-head trial data or indirect comparison analyses between dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of dexlansoprazole with esomeprazole in healing erosive oesophagitis (EO), the maintenance of healed EO and the treatment of non-erosive reflux disease (NERD).

METHODS

Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing dexlansoprazole or esomeprazole with either placebo or another PPI were systematically reviewed. Random-effect meta-analyses and adjusted indirect comparisons were conducted to compare the treatment effect of dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole using a common comparator. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

The indirect comparisons revealed significant differences in symptom control of heartburn in patients with NERD at 4 weeks. Dexlansoprazole 30 mg was more effective than esomeprazole 20 mg or 40 mg (RR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.15-3.51; RR: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.39-3.38). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two drugs in EO healing and maintenance of healed EO. Comparison of symptom control in healed EO was not able to be made due to different definitions used in the RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjusted indirect comparisons based on currently available RCT data suggested significantly better treatment effect in symptom control of heartburn in patients with NERD for dexlansoprazole against esomeprazole. No statistically significant differences were found in other EO outcomes. However, these study findings need to be interpreted with caution due to small number of studies and other limitations.

Proton pump inhibitors: the good, the bad, and the unwanted

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most commonly prescribed classes of medications in the United States. By inhibiting gastric H/K adenosine triphosphatase via covalent binding to the cysteine residues of the proton pump, they provide the most potent acid suppression available. Long-term PPI use accounts for the majority of total PPI use. Absolute indications include peptic ulcer disease, chronic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs use, treatment of Helicobacter pylori, and erosive esophagitis. Although PPIs are generally considered safe, numerous adverse effects, particularly associated with long-term use have been reported. Many patients receiving chronic PPI therapy do not have clear indications for their use, prompting consideration for reduction or discontinuation of their use. This article reviews the indications for PPI use, the adverse effects/risks involved with their use, and conditions in which their use is controversial.

PPI therapy is equally effective in well-defined non-erosive reflux disease and in reflux esophagitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

  Symptomatic response to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) is often reported as lower than in patients with erosive reflux disease (ERD). However, the definition of NERD differs across clinical trials. This meta-analysis aims to estimate the rate of symptom relief in response to PPI in NERD patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE (1966-2010), Cochrane Comprehensive Trial Register (1997-2010) and EMBASE (1985-2010) databases were searched and manual searches from studies' references were performed. Randomized clinical trials were selected that included patients with heartburn, and analyzed the effect of short-term PPI treatment. The primary outcome of selected studies was defined as complete or partial heartburn relief. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality of selected articles. Random effects models and meta-regression were used to combine and analyze results.

KEY RESULTS

The pooled estimate of complete relief of heartburn after 4 weeks of PPI therapy in patients with ERD was 0.72 (95% CI 0.69-0.74) (32 studies), vs 0.50 (0.43-0.57) (eight studies) in empirically treated patients, 0.49 (0.44-0.55) (12 studies) in patients defined as non-erosive by negative endoscopy, and 0.73 (0.69-0.77) (two studies) in patients defined as non-erosive by both negative endoscopy and a positive pH-test.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

In well-defined NERD patients, the estimated complete symptom response rate after PPI therapy is comparable to the response rate in patients with ERD. The previously reported low response rate in studies with patients classified as NERD is likely the result of inclusion of patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms that do not have reflux disease.

A study on the efficacy of rebamipide for patients with proton pump inhibitor-refractory non-erosive reflux disease

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Reflux symptoms in patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) cannot be easily controlled by treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPI). The anti-inflammatory function of rebamipide may be effective for protecting the esophageal mucosa. This prospective randomized multicenter placebo-controlled study was performed to clarify the efficacy of rebamipide for NERD patients whose reflux symptoms were refractory to PPI treatment.

METHODS

One hundred forty-nine patients were enrolled on the basis of a QUEST score of over 6 and absence of endoscopically proven esophageal mucosal breaks. All the patients were initially administered 15 mg of lansoprazole for 4 weeks, and the symptoms were then assessed using QUEST and GSRS. PPI-refractory patients were randomly assigned to administration of rebamipide or placebo t.i.d. for 4 weeks.

RESULTS

Three of the 149 patients were lost to follow-up, and 60 among the remaining 146 patients were found to be PPI-refractory. Among these PPI-refractory patients, 31 were randomly assigned to a rebamipide group and 29 to a placebo group. At the end of drug administration, the QUEST and GSRS scores did not differ between the rebamipide and placebo groups, although a significantly higher proportion of patients in the rebamipide group showed amelioration of abdominal pain and diarrhea.

CONCLUSION

Administration of rebamipide cannot effectively control reflux symptoms in NERD patients whose symptoms are refractory to PPI therapy.

Improvement in health-related quality of life after therapy with omeprazole in patients with coronary artery disease and recurrent angina-like chest pain. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the SF-36 survey

Background

Many patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) have overlapping gastroenterological causes of recurrent chest pain, mainly due to gastroesophageal reflux (GER) and aspirin-induced gastrointestinal tract damage. These symptoms can be alleviated by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The study addressed whether omeprazole treatment also affects general health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with CAD.

Study

48 patients with more than 50% narrowing of the coronary arteries on angiography without clinically overt gastrointestinal symptoms were studied. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study design, patients were randomized to take omeprazole 20 mg bid or a placebo for two weeks, and then crossed over to the other study arm. The SF-36 questionnaire was completed before treatment and again after two weeks of therapy.

Results

Patients treated with omeprazole in comparison to the subjects taking the placebo had significantly greater values for the SF-36 survey (which relates to both physical and mental health), as well as for bodily pain, general health perception, and physical health. In comparison to the baseline values, therapy with omeprazole led to a significant increase in the three summarized health components: total SF-36; physical and mental health; and in the following detailed health concept scores: physical functioning, limitations due to physical health problems, bodily pain and emotional well-being.

Conclusions

A double dose of omeprazole improved the general HRQL in patients with CAD without severe gastrointestinal symptoms more effectively than the placebo.

The pain system in oesophageal disorders: mechanisms, clinical characteristics, and treatment

Pain is common in gastroenterology. This review aims at giving an overview of pain mechanisms, clinical features, and treatment options in oesophageal disorders. The oesophagus has sensory receptors specific for different stimuli. Painful stimuli are encoded by nociceptors and communicated via afferent nerves to the central nervous system. The pain stimulus is further processed and modulated in specific pain centres in the brain, which may undergo plastic alterations. Hence, tissue inflammation and long-term exposure to pain can cause sensitisation and hypersensitivity. Oesophageal sensitivity can be evaluated ,for example, with the oesophageal multimodal probe. Treatment should target the cause of the patient's symptoms. In gastro-oesophageal reflux diseases, proton pump inhibitors are the primary treatment option, surgery being reserved for patients with severe disease resistant to drug therapy. Functional oesophageal disorders are treated with analgesics, antidepressants, and psychological therapy. Lifestyle changes are another option with less documentation.

Alterations of Mast Cells in the Esophageal Mucosa of the Patients With Non-Erosive Reflux Disease

BACKGROUND

Mast cells (MCs) are widely distributed in the gastrointestinal tract, which could be involved in visceral hypersensitivity and gut dysmotility. Whether esophageal MCs play a role in non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) has yet to be determined. The aim of this study was to characterize esophageal MCs distribution, degranulation, and ultrastructure.

METHODS

The esophageal mucosa at 5 cm above the end of esophagus was obtained from 26 NERD and 14 healthy volunteers (control) by gastroscopy. Immunohistochemistry was performed and average MC counts per high-power field (HPF) and the percentage of degranulated MCs were obtained. The ultrastructure of MCs was observed by transmission electron microscope (TEM).

RESULTS

More MCs were observed in NERD (7.23 ± 2.41 cells/HPF) as compared with controls (3.79 ± 1.67 cells/HPF) (P < 0.01) and the percentage of degranulated MCs in NERD was also significantly higher than controls (26.85 ± 8.79% vs 11.5 ± 4.18%, P < 0.01). Under TEM, more Golgi apparatus, mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum were found in MCs in patients with NERD. Special secreting particles were also found in cytoplasm, more vacuoles were left after MCs degranulation in patients with NERD.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that increased numbers of MCs and MCs activation may be involved in the pathogenesis of NERD.

Efficacy of the addition of prokinetics for proton pump inhibitor (PPI) resistant non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) patients: significance of frequency scale for the symptom of GERD (FSSG) on decision of treatment strategy

BACKGROUND

Non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) is a more difficult to treat than reflux esophagitis (RE) due to the high prevalence of PPI resistance. Consequently, the treatment strategy for NERD is yet to be established.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Subjects were 467 GERD patients (NERD 349, RE 118, 47.4 +/- 16.7 years) with reflux symptoms such as heartburn. PPI was administered for 2 weeks, and total score (TS) of symptoms, seven items of reflux symptoms e.g. heartburn (reflux score: RS), and five items of dyspeptic symptoms e.g. heavy stomach (dyspeptic score: DS) were assessed using the frequency scale for the symptoms of GERD (FSSG), a GERD-specific questionnaire developed in Japan. Improvement <50% in TS was defined as non-responder. Patients' background, and pretreatment TS, RS, DS, and 12 items of FSSG were assessed. Furthermore, the effect of additional prokinetics (4 weeks) for 117 PPI non-response NERD patients was also examined.

RESULTS

Younger age, constipation, higher TS, DS, F2 (bloated stomach), 3 (heavy stomach), 5 (sick feeling after meal), 8 (satiety during meal) in FSSG were factors to be PPI non-responders in NERD. Significant improvement in TS were observed (pretreatment: 17.4 +/- 7.7 vs. 2 weeks 14.6 +/- 6.0 vs. 6 weeks 7.7 +/- 5.2, p<0.0001) after the addition of prokinetics in PPI non-response NERD.

CONCLUSION

Younger age, constipation, dysmotility were factors of PPI non-response in NERD. As high DS is correlated with PPI non-response, it is indicated that patients with strong dysmotility and functional dyspepsia complication might be PPI resistant. The efficacy of additional prokinetics for PPI non-response NERD was observed.