Primary prevention of diclofenac associated ulcers and dyspepsia by omeprazole or triple therapy in Helicobacter pylori positive patients: a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, clinical trial

[Peptic ulcer]

Peptic ulcer disease is a frequent pathology; although the incidence has decreased in recent years, it continues to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality associated with high healthcare costs. The most important risk factors are Helicobacter pylori(H. pylori) infection and the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Most patients with peptic ulcer disease remain asymptomatic, with dyspepsia being the most frequent and often characteristic symptom. It can also debut with complications such as upper gastrointestinal bleeding, perforation or stenosis. The diagnostic technique of choice is upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Treatment with proton pump inhibitors, eradication of H. pylori and avoiding the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the basis of treatment. However, prevention is the best strategy, it includes an adequate indication of proton pump inhibitors, investigation and treatment of H. pylori, avoiding non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or using those that are less gastrolesive.

Clinical Guidelines for Drug-Related Peptic Ulcer, 2020 Revised Edition

Korean guidelines for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcer were previously developed in 2009 with the collaboration of the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research and Korean Society of Gastroenterology. However, the previous guidelines were based mainly upon a review of the relevant literature and expert opinion. Therefore, the guidelines need to be revised. We organized a guideline Development Committee for drug-related peptic ulcer under the auspices of the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2017 and developed nine statements, including four for NSAIDs, three for aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and two for anticoagulants through a de novo process founded on evidence-based medicine that included a literature search and a meta-analysis, A consensus was reached through the application of the modified Delphi method. The primary target of these guidelines is adult patients undergoing long-term treatment with NSAIDs, aspirin or other antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants. The revised guidelines reflect the expert consensus and is intended to assist clinicians in the management and prevention of drug-induced peptic ulcer and associated conditions.

[Clinical Guidelines for Drug-induced Peptic Ulcer, 2020 Revised Edition]

The Korean guidelines for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcers were previously developed under co-work with the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research and Korean Society of Gastroenterology at 2009. On the other hand, the previous guidelines were based mainly on a literature review and expert opinions. Therefore, the guidelines need to be revised. In this study, a guideline development committee for drug-induced peptic ulcers was organized under the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2017. Nine statements were developed, including four for NSAID, three for aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and two for anticoagulants through de novo processes based on evidence-based medicine, such as a literature search, meta-analysis, and the consensus was established using the modified Delphi method. The primary target of this guideline was adult patients taking long-term NSAIDs, aspirin, or other antiplatelet agent and anticoagulants. The revised guidelines reflect the consensus of expert opinions and are intended to assist relevant clinicians in the management and prevention of drug-induced peptic ulcers and associated conditions.

[Helicobacter pylori Eradication in Drug-related Peptic Ulcer]

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and aspirin are the most frequently prescribed drugs worldwide, and their long-term use often leads to peptic ulcers (PUs) along with serious complications, such as bleeding and perforation. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is a significant risk factor for developing NSAID-related PU and ulcer bleeding during long-term aspirin use. In a revised version of the Clinical Guidelines for Drug-induced Peptic Ulcer, two statements regarding H. pylori eradication are recommended. 1) Patients scheduled for long-term NSAID therapy should be tested and treated for H. pylori infection to prevent PU and its complications. 2) Patients with a history of PU receiving long-term low-dose aspirin (LDA) therapy should undergo treatment for H. pylori infection to prevent PU and its complications. On the other hand, unlike NSAID-naïve patients, the preventive effects of H. pylori eradication in chronic NSAID users are unclear. In addition, anti-ulcer drugs, such as proton pump inhibitors, may be necessary for maintenance therapy after H. pylori eradication in a subset of long-term LDA users, particularly if the patients are taking concomitant antiplatelet agents or anticoagulants.

Prevention of Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug-induced Peptic Ulcers

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) are some of the most commonly prescribed medications in clinical practice. The long-term use of NSAIDs is one of the main causes of peptic ulcers and the increased risk of upper gastrointestinal tract complications, such as perforation and bleeding. Thus, the prevention of NSAID-induced peptic ulcers is an important clinical issue. Previous studies have evaluated various strategies for preventing ulcers in patients requiring prolonged NSAID use. The Korean clinical practice guidelines have been published recently based on the evidence of the currently available data. This review describes the strategies for the prevention of peptic ulcers due to NSAID. An assessment of the risk factors for peptic ulcers from NSAID is recommended to identify patients who should be considered for primary prophylaxis. The risk of NSAID-induced peptic ulcers can be reduced by the concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), misoprostol, and histamine-2 receptor antagonists. Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors can be used with caution due to concerns regarding cardiovascular toxicity. Attempts should be made to use the lowest dose and shortest duration of the NSAID.

Repurposing sodium diclofenac as a radiation countermeasure agent: A cytogenetic study in human peripheral blood lymphocytes

We assessed the radioprotective and mitigative actions of sodium diclofenac, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug using cultured human peripheral blood as a model. Both pre- and post-irradiation treatments with the drug reduced gamma radiation-induced formation of dicentric chromosome, cytochalasin-blocked micronuclei and γ-H2AX foci in human peripheral blood lymphocytes. This work supports the concept that sodium diclofenac may be a useful radiation countermeasure agent.

Dyspepsia in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users and the effect of preventive measures

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate regular non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) users for dyspepsia, as well as to assess the effect of preventive measures, and the reasons for non-adherence to gastroprotective agents (GPA) from a real-world perspective.

METHODS

A prospective longitudinal study was conducted among outpatients with regular NSAID usage. The presence of dyspepsia was assessed by locally validated versions of the Leeds dyspepsia questionnaire (LDQ), GPA and the participants' adherence to the drugs were assessed at recruitment and 2 weeks later. GPA was defined as the use of antisecretory medications or cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors.

RESULTS

Initially, 409 participants (mean age 52.3 ± 14.6 years, 60.6% females, 48.4% treated for musculoskeletal pain) were recruited. At recruitment, 50.9% of the participants had at least one upper gastrointestinal symptom. Complete data for follow-up analysis were collected from 158 participants who were naive NSAID users, had no prior gastrointestinal medication and who could be contacted. At 2-week follow-up there was no significant difference in the LDQ score change between NSAID users treated with GPA and those did not. However, there was a greater reduction in abdominal pain/discomfort (8.8% vs 5.0%, P < 0.001) and burping (8.8% vs 4.0%, P < 0.001) among participants using GPA compared with those who were not. Adherence to GPA was poor, with study participants citing the absence of gastrointestinal symptoms as their main reason for non-adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of GPA in patients on regular NSAIDs does not improve their overall dyspepsia, but it reduces abdominal pain and burping. Poor adherence to GPA may be a contributing factor.

The Indications, Applications, and Risks of Proton Pump Inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are the most effective drugs for inhibiting gastric acid secretion. They have been in clinical use for more than 25 years, In 2014, 3.475 billion daily defined doses (DDD) of PPI were prescribed in Germany. This high number alone calls for a critical analysis of the spectrum of indications for PPI and their potential adverse effects.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases, with particular emphasis on randomized, prospective multicenter trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

The inhibition of gastric acid secretion with PPI is successfully used for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease and of gastric and duodenal ulcers, for the secondary prevention of gastroduodenal lesions that have arisen under treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetylsalicylic acid, and for the prevention of recurrent hemorrhage from ulcers after successful endoscopic hemostasis. PPI are given along with practically all antibiotic regimens for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection. The number of prescriptions for PPI has risen linearly over the past 25 years. As there has been no broadening of indications, one may well ask whether the current, extensive use of PPI is justified. There is evidence that patients taking PPI are at greater risk for fractures. Moreover, the vitamin B12 level should be checked occasionally in all patients taking PPI.

CONCLUSION

PPI are among the more effective drugs for the treatment of diseases associated with gastric acid. In view of their cost and potential adverse effects, they should only be prescribed for scientifically validated indications.

Helicobacter pylori infection in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug users

NSAID-induced upper gastrointestinal (GI) damage occurs easily in people with a prior history of complicated or uncomplicated ulcers. Many recent clinical studies have proved the benefit of Helicobacter pylori eradication in NSAID users; however, the exact pathophysiologic relationship between concomitant H. pylori infection and NSAID use has not yet been fully elucidated. Testing and eradication of H. pylori are generally recommended in patients who are at a high risk for NSAID-induced GI damage. However, in high-risk patients, ulcer prophylaxis with proton pump inhibitor or misoprostol is needed even if H. pylori has been successfully eradicated. In low-risk patients, it is still questionable whether or not eradication of H. pylori can reduce upper GI damage. However, in western countries, due to its cost effectiveness, testing and eradication of H. pylori is recommended before starting aspirin or NSAID irrespective of the risk level. In regions with a high prevalence of H. pylori infection (>20%), the usefulness of testing and eradication of H. pylori has not yet been determined.

[Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in Korea, 2013 revised edition]

Since the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research has first developed the guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in 1998, the revised guideline was proposed in 2009 by the same group. Although the revised guideline was made by comprehensive review of previous articles and consensus of authoritative expert opinions, the evidence-based developmental process was not applied in the revision of the guideline. This new guideline has been revised especially in terms of changes in the indication and treatment of H. pylori infection in Korea, and developed by the adaptation process as evidence-based method; 6 guidelines were retrieved by systematic review and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II process, 21 statements were made with grading system and revised by modified Delphi method. After revision, 11 statements for the indication of test and treatment, 4 statements for the diagnosis and 4 statements for the treatment have been developed, respectively. The revised guideline has been reviewed by external experts before the official endorsement, and will be disseminated for usual clinical practice in Korea. Also, the scheduled update and revision of the guideline will be made periodically.

Cost Effectiveness Associated with Helicobacter pylori Screening and Eradication in Patients Taking Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and/or Aspirin

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This study was performed to investigate the cost effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori screening/eradication in South Korean patients treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and/or aspirin.

METHODS

A decision Markov model was used to estimate the effectiveness and economic impact of an H. pylori screening/eradication strategy compared to a no-screening strategy among patients who were included in the model at the age of 40 years. Utility weights were applied to four of the health status groups to reflect quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The costs of screening, H. pylori eradication, and managing peptic ulcer and ulcer complications were obtained from South Korea-specific data.

RESULTS

The total costs per patient were US $2,454 for the H. pylori screening/eradication and US $3,182 for the no-screening strategy. The QALYs for the two strategies were 16.05 and 15.73, respectively. The results were robust for the analyses of all different cohort groups who entered the model at the age of 30, 50, or 60 years and for NSAIDs-naïve patients. Through the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the robustness of our study's results was also determined.

CONCLUSIONS

The H. pylori screening/eradication strategy was found to be less expensive and more effective compared to the no-screening strategy among South Korean patients taking NSAIDs and/or aspirin.

Cost Effectiveness Associated with Helicobacter pylori Screening and Eradication in Patients Taking Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and/or Aspirin

Background/Aims

This study was performed to investigate the cost effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori screening/eradication in South Korean patients treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and/or aspirin.

Methods

A decision Markov model was used to estimate the effectiveness and economic impact of an H. pylori screening/eradication strategy compared to a no-screening strategy among patients who were included in the model at the age of 40 years. Utility weights were applied to four of the health status groups to reflect quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The costs of screening, H. pylori eradication, and managing peptic ulcer and ulcer complications were obtained from South Korea-specific data.

Results

The total costs per patient were US $2,454 for the H. pylori screening/eradication and US $3,182 for the no-screening strategy. The QALYs for the two strategies were 16.05 and 15.73, respectively. The results were robust for the analyses of all different cohort groups who entered the model at the age of 30, 50, or 60 years and for NSAIDs-naïve patients. Through the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the robustness of our study's results was also determined.

Conclusions

The H. pylori screening/eradication strategy was found to be less expensive and more effective compared to the no-screening strategy among South Korean patients taking NSAIDs and/or aspirin.

Eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection reduces the incidence of peptic ulcer disease in patients using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: a meta-analysis

AIM

To investigate the association between use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) and Helicobacter pylori infection, interactive effect of H. pylori infection and NSAID use on the development of peptic ulcer disease (PUD), and the effect of H. pylori eradication therapy on PUD development.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in EMBASE and PubMed for relevant articles published in English between January 1989 and August 2010, with the following MeSH and/or key words: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or NSAIDs, Helicobacter pylori, or H. pylori, peptic ulcer disease or PUD, and randomized-control study or clinical trial. The meta-analysis was conducted using the Review Manager 4.2.2.

RESULTS

In the analysis of five studies, the pooled prevalence of H. pylori infection was 74.5% and 71.1% in NSAID users and non-NSAID users, respectively, (OR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.35-1.20, p = .170). In the analysis of nine studies, the pooled prevalence of PUD in NSAID users was 31.2% and 17.9% in the presence and absence of H. pylori infection, respectively, (OR = 3.08; 95% CI: 1.26-7.55, p = .010). Moreover, in the analysis of seven studies, PUD developed in 6.4% and 11.8% of NSAID users with and without eradication therapy, respectively (OR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.36-0.74, p < .001). The preventive effect of the eradication therapy was further revealed in NSAID-naive users (OR = 0.26; 95% CI: 0.14-0.49, p < .0001) and in the Asian population (OR = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.16-0.56, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

NSAID use is not associated with H. pylori infection in patients with PUD. PUD is more common in H. pylori positive than in negative NSAID users. Moreover, H. pylori eradication therapy reduces PUD incidence in NSAID users, especially in naive users and in the Asian population.

Efficacy of serology driven "test and treat strategy" for eradication of H. pylori in patients with rheumatic disease in the Netherlands

The treatment of choice of H. pylori infections is a 7-day triple-therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) plus amoxicillin and either clarithromycin or metronidazole, depending on local antibiotic resistance rates. The data on efficacy of eradication therapy in a group of rheumatology patients on long-term NSAID therapy are reported here. This study was part of a nationwide, multicenter RCT that took place in 2000-2002 in the Netherlands. Patients who tested positive for H. pylori IgG antibodies were included and randomly assigned to either eradication PPI-triple therapy or placebo. After completion, follow-up at 3 months was done by endoscopy and biopsies were sent for culture and histology. In the eradication group 13% (20/152, 95% CI 9-20%) and in the placebo group 79% (123/155, 95% CI 72-85%) of the patients were H. pylori positive by histology or culture. H. pylori was successfully eradicated in 91% of the patients who were fully compliant to therapy, compared to 50% of those who were not (difference of 41%; 95% CI 18-63%). Resistance percentages found in isolates of the placebo group were: 4% to clarithromycin, 19% to metronidazole, 1% to amoxicillin and 2% to tetracycline.

Role of Helicobacter pylori infection in gastroduodenal damage in patients starting NSAID therapy: 4 Months follow-up study

AIMS

We aimed to determine differences in gastroduodenal damage related to the presence of Helicobacter pylori (Hp) in patients starting long-term NSAID therapy. Seventy-one candidates for chronic NSAIDs therapy (33 Hp negative and 38 Hp positive) entered the study and underwent upper GI endoscopy before, and 8 and 16 weeks after, continuous NSAID therapy.

RESULTS

Lanza score increased in both Hp positive and negative patients in the course of NSAID therapy (P < 0.001), being significantly higher in Hp positive than Hp negative (4.31 ± 1.33 vs 3.15 ± 1.95, P < 0.05) after 16 weeks of follow-up. In gastric mucosa, no significant difference in mean Lanza score was observed between the two groups. Duodenal ulcer was diagnosed in 18 (36.8%) Hp positive and 1 (3%) Hp negative patient (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Hp is more closely related to duodenal than gastric mucosal injury in NSAID users. Risk for duodenal ulcer in Hp-infected individual increases after 4 months of NSAID therapy.

Interaction of Helicobacter pylori infection and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in gastric and duodenal ulcers

BACKGROUND

Gastric (GU) and duodenal ulcers (DU) are in most instances either induced by Helicobacter pylori infection or by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Whether eradication of H. pylori is beneficial in NSAID users for preventing NSAID induced GU and DU has been the focus of different studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mechanisms shared by both H. pylori and NSAIDs for the induction of GU and DU were reviewed and randomized controlled trials on H. pylori eradication for prevention and healing of GU and DU in patients requiring NSAID therapy were identified by a PubMed search.

RESULTS

Key factors in the induction of GU and DU for both H. pylori and NSAIDs are a decrease in pH, imbalance between apoptosis and proliferation, reduction in mucosal blood flow, and recruitment of polymorphonucleates in distinct compartments. For primary ulcer prevention, H. pylori eradication before starting an NSAID therapy reduces the risk of NSAID induced GU and virtually abolishes the risk of DU. H. pylori eradication alone is not sufficient for secondary prevention of NSAID induced GU and DU. H. pylori infection appears to further increase the protective effects of proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) to reduce the risk of ulcer relapse. H. pylori eradication does not influence the healing of both GU and DU if NSAID intake is discontinued.

CONCLUSIONS

Duodenal ulcer is more closely related to H. pylori infection than GU in NSAID users. H. pylori eradication is recommended for primary prevention of GU and DU in patients requiring NSAID therapy. PPI therapy is mandatory for secondary prevention of gastroduodenal ulcers, and appears to further reduce the risk of ulcer relapse in the presence of H. pylori.

Guidelines for the management of Helicobacter pylori infection in Japan: 2009 revised edition

BACKGROUND

Over the past few years, the profile of Helicobacter pylori infection has changed in Japan. In particular, the relationship between H. pylori and gastric cancer has been demonstrated more clearly. Accordingly, the committee of the Japanese Society for Helicobacter Research has revised the guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of H. pylori infection in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four meetings of guidelines preparation committee were held from July 2007 to December 2008. In the new guidelines, recommendations for treatment have been classified into five grades according to the Minds Recommendation Grades, while the level of evidence has been classified into six grades. The Japanese national health insurance system was not taken into consideration when preparing these guidelines.

RESULTS

Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy achieved a Grade A recommendation, being useful for the treatment of gastric or duodenal ulcer, for the treatment and prevention of H. pylori-associated diseases such as gastric cancer, and for inhibiting the spread of H. pylori infection. Levels of evidence were determined for each disease associated with H. pylori infection. For the diagnosis of H. pylori infection, measurement of H. pylori antigen in the feces was added to the tests not requiring biopsy. One week of proton-pump inhibitor-based triple therapy (including amoxicillin and metronidazole) was recommended as second-line therapy after failure of first-line eradication therapy.

CONCLUSION

The revised Japanese guidelines for H. pylori are based on scientific evidence and avoid the administrative restraints that applied to earlier versions.

Evidence for endoscopic ulcers as meaningful surrogate endpoint for clinically significant upper gastrointestinal harm

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Surrogate endpoints are biomarkers intended to substitute for a clinical endpoint. Are endoscopic ulcers a useful surrogate endpoint for a biological progression to clinical endpoints of ulcer complications (perforation, ulcers, and bleeds), hospital admission, or death?

METHODS

Review of randomized trials, meta-analyses, clinical outcomes trials, and observational studies.

RESULTS

No large study examined both endoscopic and clinical endpoints. Endoscopic ulcers and clinically significant ulcer complications were affected in the same direction and to about the same extent in 4 distinct circumstances: (1) by risk factors-age, previous history of symptomatic ulcer or bleeding, Helicobacter pylori, aspirin; (2) in studies of antiulcer treatments with differing modes of action, especially in relation to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug toxicity, and Helicobacter pylori infection; (3) in studies evaluating ulcer complications with Cox-2 selective drugs and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; and (4) in studies of interventions in patients with high risk of recurrent ulcer bleed needing nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug therapy. All study designs showed consistent and reproducible effects on gastrointestinal ulcer complications paralleling endoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent and plausible findings from disparate populations and designs make endoscopic ulcers a strong candidate for surrogacy, though direct progression from endoscopic ulcers to ulcer complications cannot be demonstrated. Large outcome studies are needed to establish the power of the surrogacy, absolute risk of clinical outcomes, and to identify the totality of risks and benefits of new pharmacologic therapies.

Prevention of NSAID-related upper gastrointestinal toxicity: a meta-analysis of traditional NSAIDs with gastroprotection and COX-2 inhibitors

Background:

Traditional NSAIDs (tNSAIDs) and COX-2 inhibitors (COX-2s) are important agents for the treatment of a variety or arthritic conditions. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the effectiveness of misoprostol, H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs), and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the prevention of tNSAID related upper gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, and to review the upper gastrointestinal (GI) safety of COX-2s.

Methods:

An extensive literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prophylactic agents used for the prevention of upper GI toxicity, and RCTs that assessed the GI safety of the newer COX-2s. Meta-analysis was performed in accordance with accepted techniques.

Results:

39 gastroprotection and 69 COX-2 RCTs met inclusion criteria. Misoprostol, PPIs, and double doses of H2RAs are effective at reducing the risk of both endoscopic gastric and duodenal tNSAID-induced ulcers. Standard doses of H2RAs are not effective at reducing the risk of tNSAID-induced gastric ulcers, but reduce the risk of duodenal ulcers. Misoprostol is associated with greater adverse effects than the other agents, particularly at higher doses. COX-2s are associated with fewer endoscopic ulcers and clinically important ulcer complications, and have fewer treatment withdrawals due to GI symptoms than tNSAIDS. Acetylsalicylic acid appears to diminish the benefit of COX-2s over tNSAIDs. In high risk GI patients, tNSAID with a PPI or a COX-2 alone appear to offer similar GI safety, but a strategy of a COX-2 with a PPI appears to offer the greatest GI safety.

Conclusion:

Several strategies are available to reduce the risk of upper GI toxicity with tNSAIDs. The choice between these strategies needs to consider patients’ underlying GI and cardiovascular risk.

Peptic ulcer disease

Peptic ulcer disease had a tremendous effect on morbidity and mortality until the last decades of the 20th century, when epidemiological trends started to point to an impressive fall in its incidence. Two important developments are associated with the decrease in rates of peptic ulcer disease: the discovery of effective and potent acid suppressants, and of Helicobacter pylori. With the discovery of H pylori infection, the causes, pathogenesis, and treatment of peptic ulcer disease have been rewritten. We focus on this revolution of understanding and management of peptic ulcer disease over the past 25 years. Despite substantial advances, this disease remains an important clinical problem, largely because of the increasingly widespread use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and low-dose aspirin. We discuss the role of these agents in the causes of ulcer disease and therapeutic and preventive strategies for drug-induced ulcers. The rare but increasingly problematic H pylori-negative NSAID-negative ulcer is also examined.

Helicobacter pylori infection

INTRODUCTION

The principal effect of Helicobacter pylori infection is lifelong chronic gastritis, affecting up to 20% of younger adults but 50% to 80% of adults born in resource-rich countries before 1950.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment in people with a confirmed duodenal ulcer, a confirmed gastric ulcer, confirmed gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), confirmed non-ulcer dyspepsia, uninvestigated dyspepsia, localised B cell lymphoma of the stomach, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related peptic ulcers? What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment for preventing NSAID-related peptic ulcers in people with or without previous ulcers or dyspepsia? What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment on the risk of developing gastric cancer? Do H pylori eradication treatments differ in their effects? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 58 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: effects of H pylori eradication in different populations; relative effects of triple regimens, quadruple regimens, and sequential regimens.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and cyclooxygenase inhibition in the gastrointestinal tract: a trip from peptic ulcer to colon cancer

Aspirin was commercialized more than a 100 years ago. Today, this compound is still widely prescribed, and new mechanisms of action and indications are being tested. Inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 and COX-2 by aspirin or its related compounds, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), has been associated with both adverse and beneficial effects in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Inhibition of COX-1 has been linked to GI adverse effects. Adverse effects of NSAIDs and aspirin in the upper GI tract include esophagitis, peptic ulcer, peptic ulcer complications, and death. Effective preventive therapies are available that have been associated with a progressive decline in the rate of hospitalization due to upper GI complications. NSAIDs and aspirin can also damage the small bowel and the colon. NSAID enteropathy is frequent and in most cases subclinical (increased mucosal permeability, inflammation, erosion, ulcer). However, more serious clinical outcomes such as anemia, bleeding, perforation, obstruction, diverticulitis, and deaths have also been described. Prevention therapy of NSAID damage to the lower GI tract is not well defined. Inhibition of COX-2 by NSAIDs, coxibs, or aspirin seems to provide beneficial effects to the GI tract. Observational studies show that these compounds reduce the risk of both upper and lower GI cancers. Randomized controlled trials have shown that aspirin and coxibs reduce the recurrence rate of colonic polyps, and long-term cohort studies have shown that aspirin reduces the risk of colon cancer time and dose dependently. New studies will have to define the appropriate population that may benefit with these therapies.

Management of NSAID-induced gastrointestinal toxicity: focus on proton pump inhibitors

The association between NSAIDs and the presence of upper gastrointestinal (GI) complications is well established. Evidence that acid aggravates NSAID-induced injury provides a rationale for minimizing such damage by acid suppression. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) appear to be very effective in treating NSAID-related dyspepsia, and also in healing gastric and duodenal ulcers in patients continuing to receive the NSAID. An analysis of data from comparative studies of PPIs versus ranitidine, misoprostol and sucralfate shows a therapeutic advantage in favour of the PPI. Several studies now confirm the efficacy of co-therapy with PPIs in the short- and long-term prevention of NSAID-induced upper GI injury. PPIs are more effective than histamine H(2)-receptor antagonists at standard dosages in reducing the risk of gastric and duodenal ulcer, and are superior to misoprostol in preventing duodenal but not gastric lesions. However, when balancing effectiveness and tolerance, PPIs may be considered the treatment of choice in the short- and long-term prevention of NSAID-related mucosal lesions. To date, there are only a few published articles dealing with the role of PPIs in the prevention of upper GI complications. Recent epidemiological and interventional studies provide some evidence that PPIs are of benefit. However, more controlled studies using clinical outcomes are needed to establish the best management strategy (PPIs combined with traditional NSAIDs or with cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors) especially in patients with multiple risk factors, in patients using concomitant low-dose aspirin, corticosteroids or anticoagulants (high risk group), or in patients with a history of ulcer complications (very high risk group). Furthermore, it should be underlined that Helicobacter pylori infection positively interacts with the gastroprotective effect of PPIs; therefore, the true efficacy of these drugs in preventing NSAID-related ulcer complications should be reassessed without the confounding influence of this microorganism.

Helicobacter pylori and NSAID-induced gastric ulcer in a Japanese population

A recent meta-analysis by Huang et al. clarified that Helicobacter pylori infection and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are important factors for peptic ulcer. The results showed that the risk for ulcer in NSAID(+)/H. pylori(+) patients was 61.1 fold higher when compared with NSAID(-)/H. pylori(-) patients. Some gastric ulcers detected in patients on NSAID therapy may actually be caused by H. pylori, but it is difficult to differentiate NSAID-induced gastric ulcer from H. pylori-induced gastric ulcer. Several studies have investigated the effects of H. pylori eradication on ulcer healing. One study reported that H. pylori eradication actually lowered the healing rate of gastric ulcers. Because there have been no studies finding that H. pylori eradication facilitates healing, H. pylori eradication is not recommended for NSAID users. Concerning the efficacy of H. pylori eradication in the prevention of NSAID-induced gastric ulcer, a meta-analysis concluded that among all patients on NSAID therapy, H. pylori eradication lowered the prevalence of ulcer, which was particularly marked in NSAID-naïve patients. When compared with those of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), the preventative effects of H. pylori eradication were inferior. In Japan, national health insurance does not cover procedures that prevent or lower the risk for NSAID-induced ulcer. When administering NSAID to patients with risk factors, it is desirable to administer antiulcer agents.

Canadian consensus guidelines on long-term nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug therapy and the need for gastroprotection: benefits versus risks

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used, but are not without risks.

AIM

To provide evidence-based management recommendations to help clinicians determine optimal long-term NSAID therapy and the need for gastroprotective strategies based on an assessment of both gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular (CV) risks.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary group of 21 voting participants revised and voted on the statements and the strength of evidence (assessed according to GRADE) at a consensus meeting.

RESULTS

An algorithmic approach was developed to help manage patients who require long-term NSAID therapy. The use of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid in patients with high CV risk was assumed. For patients at low GI and CV risk, a traditional NSAID alone may be acceptable. For patients with low GI risk and high CV risk, full-dose naproxen may have a lower potential for CV risk than other NSAIDs. In patients with high GI and low CV risk, a COX-2 inhibitor plus a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) may offer the best GI safety profile. When both GI and CV risks are high and NSAID therapy is absolutely necessary, risk should be prioritized. If the primary concern is GI risk, a COX-2 inhibitor plus a PPI is recommended; if CV risk, naproxen 500 mg b.d. plus a PPI would be preferred. NSAIDs should be used at the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible duration.

CONCLUSION

More large, long-term trials that examine clinical outcomes of complicated and symptomatic upper and lower GI ulcers are needed.

Guidelines for prevention of NSAID-related ulcer complications

Guidelines for clinical practice are intended to indicate preferred approaches to medical problems as established by scientifically valid research. Double-blind, placebo-controlled studies are preferable, but compassionate use reports and expert review articles are used in a thorough review of the literature conducted through Medline with the National Library of Medicine. Only when data that will not withstand objective scrutiny are available is a recommendation identified as a consensus of experts. Guidelines are applicable to all physicians who address the subject, without regard to specialty training or interests, and are intended to indicate the preferable, but not necessarily the only, acceptable approach to a specific problem. Guidelines are intended to be flexible and must be distinguished from standards of care, which are inflexible and rarely violated. Given the wide range of specifics in any health-care problem, the physician must always choose the course best suited to the individual patient and the variables in existence at the moment of decision. These guidelines were developed under the auspices of the American College of Gastroenterology by a committee of experts in the field, reviewed by its Practice Parameters Committee, and approved by the Board of Trustees. The recommendations of these guidelines are therefore considered valid at the time of production based on the data available. New developments in medical research and practice pertinent to each guideline will be reviewed at an established time and indicated at publication to assure continued validity. Owing to the volume of new data on the subject of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related injury to the upper gastrointestinal tract, i.e., the advent of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors, new data on interactions between these agents, as well as traditional NSAIDs, with aspirin and H. pylori, it was elected by the Committee to confine these guidelines to upper gastrointestinal (GI) injury and to leave post-duodenal injury as the subject of a separate guideline.

Helicobacter pylori eradication in patients on long-term treatment with NSAIDs reduces the severity of gastritis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Maintenance use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is often complicated by gastropathy. In non-NSAID users, eradication of Helicobacter pylori is associated with decreased mucosal inflammation, and may halt the progression to atrophy and intestinal metaplasia, but the continuous use of NSAIDs may interfere with these processes.

GOAL

To investigate the effect of H. pylori eradication on gastric mucosal histology during long-term NSAID use, with and without gastroprotective therapy.

STUDY

Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were on long-term NSAIDs and were H. pylori-positive on serologic testing. Patients were randomly assigned to either eradication or placebo. Gastritis was assessed according to the updated Sydney classification for activity, chronic inflammation, gastric glandular atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, and H. pylori density.

RESULTS

Biopsy specimens were available for histology of 305 patients. Of these, 48% were on chronic gastroprotective medication. Significant less active gastritis, inflammation, and H. pylori density was found in the eradication group compared with the placebo group in both corpus and antrum (P<0.001). In the corpus, less atrophy was found in the eradication group compared with the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

H. pylori eradication in patients on long-term NSAID therapy leads to healing of gastritis despite ongoing NSAID therapy.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: adverse effects and their prevention

OBJECTIVES

To discuss nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), their history, development, mode of action, toxicities, strategies for the prevention of toxicity, and future developments.

METHODS

Medline search for articles published up to 2007, using the keywords acetylsalicylic acid, aspirin, NSAIDs, cyclooxygenase 2, adverse effects, ulcer, and cardiovascular.

RESULTS

NSAIDs are 1 of the oldest, most successful drugs known to modern medicine. They are effective for alleviating pain, fever, and inflammation by inhibiting prostaglandin synthesis. Aspirin, by its irreversible inhibition of blood platelet function, is also effective in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. NSAIDs may cause gastrointestinal ulcers, serious cardiovascular events, hypertension, acute renal failure, and worsening of preexisting heart failure. These adverse effects may be prevented by limiting NSAID dosage and duration and by performing individual risk assessments and treating patients accordingly. Those at risk for gastroduodenal ulcers may be treated with concomitant proton-pump inhibitors, misoprostol and/or COX-2 selective NSAIDs. Those at risk for cardiovascular events may be treated with naproxen and a proton-pump inhibitor or misoprostol, but should best avoid NSAID use altogether.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians should always prescribe the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible time and must take into account both the gastrointestinal and the cardiovascular risks of individual patients when prescribing NSAIDs.

Use of NSAIDs and infection with Helicobacter pylori--what does the rheumatologist need to know?

OBJECTIVES

NSAID-induced gastroduodenal lesions are a frequent and potentially serious health problem in patients with rheumatic diseases. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) has also been recognized as a major risk factor for the development of ulcer disease. However, the role of H. pylori in the pathogenesis of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal lesions has remained controversial, and there is currently no clear consensus on the management of NSAID users who are infected with H. pylori.

METHODS

To clarify this situation we have performed a systematic literature search to find randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of eradication in patients receiving NSAIDs to prevent ulcer development.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials and one meta-analysis were identified. There were three papers on NSAID-naive patients. According to this data, NSAID-naive users benefit from testing for H. pylori infection and subsequent H. pylori eradication therapy prior to the initiation of NSAID. In contrast, H. pylori eradication alone does not protect chronic NSAID users with recent ulcer complications from further gastrointestinal (GI) events. To prevent recurrent ulcer bleeding long-term acid suppressive therapy is needed.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, ulcer risk reduction after H. pylori eradication therapy is clearly more marked in patients beginning NSAID therapy than in patients who were already receiving and tolerating NSAID therapy. Thus, the management of H. pylori infection and the prevention of GI complications in NSAID users need to be individualized on the basis of recently published data.

Eradication of Helicobacter pylori does not reduce the incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers in patients on long-term NSAID treatment: double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the major causes of gastroduodenal ulcers. Studies on the benefit of eradication of H. pylori in NSAID users yielded conflicting results.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether H. pylori eradication in patients on long-term NSAIDs reduces the incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers.

METHODS

Patients on long-term NSAID treatment and who are H. pylori positive on serologic testing, were randomly assigned to either H. pylori eradication (omeprazole, amoxicillin, and clarithromycin) or placebo. Primary endpoint was the presence of endoscopic gastric or duodenal ulcers 3 months after randomization.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-five (48%) of a total of 347 patients were on gastroprotective medication. At endoscopy, gastroduodenal ulcers were diagnosed in 6 (4%) and 8 (5%) patients in the eradication and placebo group, respectively (p = .65). During follow-up of 12 months, no symptomatic ulcers or ulcer complications developed. No significant differences were found in the development of gastroduodenal erosions, dyspepsia, or in quality of life.

CONCLUSION

H. pylori eradication therapy in patients on long-term NSAID treatment had no beneficial effect on the occurrence of ulcers, erosions, or dyspepsia. Ulcer rates in both study arms are remarkably low, in both patients with and without gastroprotective therapy.

Esomeprazole: prevention and treatment of NSAID-induced symptoms and ulcers

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) represent one of the most widely used drug classes. However, many patients complain of dyspeptic symptoms impairing their quality of life: ~ 20% of patients taking NSAIDs show endoscopic ulcers with or without symptoms, and up to 2% of chronic NSAID users will develop serious complications each year, such as bleeding or perforation, which are the cause of death in many patients. Coprescription of a proton pump inhibitor is one established option for the healing and prevention of NSAID-associated lesions of the upper gastrointestinal tract in patients at risk. Recent studies evaluated the clinical efficacy of esomeprazole in the management of gastrointestinal problems associated with the intake of selective and non-selective NSAIDs and aspirin.

Helicobacter pylori and benign upper digestive disease

Acute infection with Helicobacter pylori causes hypochlorhydria and gastrointestinal upset. As the infection persists, patients develop chronic antral-predominant or pangastritis. Gastric and duodenal ulcers arise from chronic mucosal inflammation and disordered acid secretion in the stomach. With successful eradication of H. pylori, non-NSAID-related gastric and duodenal ulcers heal even without long-term acid suppression. More importantly, peptic ulcers and their complications rarely recur. Clearing H. pylori infection also reduces the risk of mucosal injury in NSAID and aspirin users; the protective effects are more pronounced in NSAID-naïve and aspirin users. H. pylori is unlikely to be the cause of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. However, a patient's reflux symptoms may be more difficult to control after clearing the infection. Although there is little evidence to support a causal relationship between H. pylori and non-ulcer dyspepsia, treatment of the infection gives a modest improvement of symptoms.

Assessment of upper gastrointestinal safety of etoricoxib and diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis in the Multinational Etoricoxib and Diclofenac Arthritis Long-term (MEDAL) programme: a randomised comparison

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal safety of cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitors versus traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has not been assessed in trials that simulate standard clinical practice. Our aim was to assess the effects of these drugs on gastrointestinal outcomes in a population that includes patients taking gastrointestinal protective therapy.

METHODS

A prespecified pooled intent-to-treat analysis of three double-blind randomised comparisons of etoricoxib (60 or 90 mg daily) and diclofenac (150 mg daily) in 34 701 patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis was done for upper gastrointestinal clinical events (bleeding, perforation, obstruction, or ulcer) and the subset of complicated events (perforation, obstruction, witnessed ulcer bleeding, or significant bleeding). We also assessed such outcomes in patients who were taking concomitant proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or low-dose aspirin. These trials are registered with , with the numbers , , and .

FINDINGS

Overall upper gastrointestinal clinical events were significantly less common with etoricoxib than with diclofenac (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; p=0.0001). There were significantly fewer uncomplicated gastrointestinal events with etoricoxib than there were with diclofenac (0.57, 0.45-0.74; p<0.0001); there was no difference in complicated events (0.91, 0.67-1.24; p=0.561). PPIs were used concomitantly for at least 75% of the study period by 13 862 (40%) and low-dose aspirin by 11 418 (33%) patients; treatment effects did not differ significantly in these individuals.

INTERPRETATION

There were significantly fewer upper gastrointestinal clinical events with the COX-2 selective inhibitor etoricoxib than with the traditional NSAID diclofenac due to a decrease in uncomplicated events, but not in the more serious complicated events. The reduction in uncomplicated events with etoricoxib is maintained in patients treated with PPIs and is also observed with regular low-dose aspirin use.

GI Risk and Risk Factors of NSAIDs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most widely used drugs in the United States. Ulcers are found at endoscopy in 15% to 30% of patients using NSAIDs regularly. The annual incidence of upper gastrointestinal (GI) complications such as bleeding with regular NSAID use is approximately 1.0% to 1.5%, whereas the annual rate of upper GI clinical events (complicated plus symptomatic uncomplicated ulcers) is approximately 2.5% to 4.5%. Upper GI symptoms such as dyspepsia also occur in many patients taking NSAIDs--at a relative risk of about 1.5 to 2 compared with that in patients without NSAID use. Important risk factors for upper GI clinical events include older age, prior history of upper GI events, use of corticosteroids or anticoagulants, and high-dose or multiple NSAIDs (including NSAID plus low-dose aspirin). Lower GI clinical events such as bleeding may also occur with NSAIDs, although they are less common and less well studied than upper GI events. The decision to employ a protective strategy to decrease NSAID-associated GI clinical events is based on risk stratification. Strategies employed include the use of non-NSAID analgesics, use of lowest effective dose of NSAID, use of medical cotherapy (eg, proton pump inhibitor, misoprostol), or use of coxibs.

Prevention of anti-inflammatory drug-induced gastrointestinal damage: benefits and risks of therapeutic strategies

Patients who take non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may develop serious gastrointestinal (GI) side effects in both the upper and lower GI tract. Those at risk should be considered for prevention with misoprostol, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or COX-2 selective inhibitor (coxib) therapy. A coxib or an NSAID+PPI combination is considered to have comparable GI safety profiles, but evidence from direct comparison is limited. PPIs are effective in the prevention of upper GI events in endoscopy trials and in a few, small, outcome trials in patients at risk. Coxibs have been evaluated in endoscopic ulcer studies and clinical outcome trials, and shown to significantly reduce the risk of upper GI ulcer and complications. Moreover, unlike PPIs, coxibs significantly reduce toxicity in the lower GI tract compared with NSAIDs. Coxibs and possibly some NSAIDs also increase the risk of developing serious cardiovascular events, an effect which may depend on the drug, dose and duration of therapy. It is not known whether concomitant low-dose aspirin use, which occurs in more than 20% of patients, will reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events, although concomitant aspirin increases the risk of developing serious GI events in patients taking either an NSAID or a coxib. Such patients may require additional PPI co-therapy. Current prevention strategies with an NSAID+PPI, misoprostol or a coxib must be considered in the individual patient with GI and cardiovascular risk factors. A PPI+coxib is indicated in those at highest risk (e.g. previous ulcer bleeding). PPI therapy must be considered for the treatment and prevention of NSAID-induced dyspepsia.

Should we eradicate Helicobacter pylori before prescribing an NSAID? Result of a placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

(1) To determine the prevalence of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in patients with and without Helicobacter pylori infection and treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and (2) to estimate the impact of H. pylori eradication on these symptoms.

METHODS

This was a multicentric, community-based, randomized, case-control study. Patients presenting with a rheumatic disorder motivating the prescription of an NSAID for at least 2 wks were stratified in two groups (H. pylori-positive and H. pylori-negative) by a serological doctor test and H. pylori-positive patients divided further into two subgroups, receiving either an eradication treatment (group 1) or a placebo (group 2). The main outcome measure was the prevalence of GI symptoms estimated in groups 1 and 2 and in noninfected patients (group 3) at weeks 2, 6, and 12.

RESULTS

Among H. pylori-negative patients (n=145), GI symptoms were present in 42.6%, 21.4%, and 10.0% at weeks 2, 6, and 12, respectively. In groups 1 and 2, GI symptoms were present in 57.7% and 40.7%, respectively, at week 2 (p= 0.03); 24.7% and 23% at week 6 (p= 0.85); and 9.4% and 17.3% at week 12 (p= 0.13). The prevalence of GI symptoms at week 2 was similar in group 2 and in the H. pylori-negative group (p= 0.77). The highest prevalence of symptoms at week 2 in group 1 was essentially due to diarrhea. The prevalence of GI symptoms was the same for groups 1 and 3 at week 12, and higher in group 2, but the difference did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

The short-term (6 wks) GI tolerance of conventional NSAIDs does not differ whether or not the patients are infected by H. pylori. The tendency observed for the medium term (12 wks) deserves to be confirmed.

Meta-analysis: role of Helicobacter pylori eradication in the prevention of peptic ulcer in NSAID users

AIM

To evaluate whether eradication of Helicobacter pylori prevents peptic ulcer in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users by means of a meta-analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and the AGA congress. Randomized trials comparing H. pylori eradication vs. non-eradication or eradication vs. a proton pump inhibitor in patients receiving a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug were selected.

RESULTS

Five studies and 939 patients were included in the analysis; 34 of 459 (7.4%) patients developed a peptic ulcer in the eradicated group vs. 64 of 480 (13.3%) in the control group. The odds ratio was 0.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.20-0.93). Sub-analyses showed a significant reduction of risk for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-naive (odds ratio = 0.26; 95% confidence interval: 0.14-0.49) but not for previously treated patients (odds ratio = 0.95, 95% confidence interval: 0.53-1.72). Two studies with a total of 385 patients compared eradication vs. a proton pump inhibitor; five of 196 (2.6%) developed a peptic ulcer in the eradicated group vs. zero of 189 (0%) in the proton pump inhibitor group (odds ratio = 7.43; 95% confidence interval: 1.27-43.6).

CONCLUSION

Helicobacter pylori eradication reduces the incidence of peptic ulcer in the overall population receiving non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. It appears to be especially effective when performed in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-naïve patients. Nonetheless, eradication seems less effective than treatment with a maintenance proton pump inhibitor for preventing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated ulcers.