First-week clinical responses to dexlansoprazole 60 mg and esomeprazole 40 mg for the treatment of grades A and B gastroesophageal reflux disease

The Effect of Dexlansoprazole on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of dexlansoprazole (a proton pump inhibitor-PPI) in resolving heartburn, reflux, and other symptoms and complications resulting from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The study followed PRISMA 2020 and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020206513). The search strategy used MeSH and free terms appropriately adapted for each database. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. The Cochrane tool (RoB 2.0) was used to assess the risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE. Ten RCTs were included. Dexlansoprazole outperformed the placebo and other PPIs in the resolution of heartburn and reflux symptoms in patients with GERD, with benefits during and after treatment, especially in those with moderate and severe symptoms. The meta-analyses indicated that dexlansoprazole at doses of 30 and 60 mg had more 24 h heartburn-free days and nights compared to the placebo medications; no difference was reported between dexlansoprazole at doses of 30 and 60 mg in heartburn-free nights. A low bias risk and a moderate certainty of evidence were observed. This review confirms the therapeutic effect of dexlansoprazole (placebo-controlled) and its improvements in GERD symptoms compared to another PPI. However, the interpretation of the results should be carried out cautiously due to the small number of included studies and other reported limitations.

Correlation between Psychosomatic Assessment, Heart Rate Variability, and Refractory GERD: A Prospective Study in Patients with Acid Reflux Esophagitis

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) affects a significant proportion of individuals, with life stress being a contributing factor. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between psychosomatic evaluations, heart rate variability (HRV), and GERD in a cohort of individuals. Additionally, the study aimed to analyze the sequencing changes following proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment and identify predictive factors associated with refractory GERD.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 105 individuals with reflux esophagitis and a control group of 50 participants without acid reflux symptoms were enrolled. Psychosomatic evaluations, including GERDQ, GERDQLQ, RSI, BAI, BDI, and SSS-8, were assessed at baseline and during treatment. HRV parameters were also evaluated. Multivariate analysis was used to identify predictive factors for refractory GERD. PPIs were administered regularly for the initial 2 months and then used on-demand. Refractory GERD was defined as less than 50% improvement in symptom relief or GERDQLQ score ≥ 20 after 8 weeks of PPI treatment.

RESULTS

The GERD group had higher scores in all psychosomatic evaluations compared to the control group (all p-values < 0.001). There were no significant changes in any parameters of HRV before and after treatment in the GERD group. Strong and consistent correlations were observed between GERD symptoms and psychological scores (BAI, BDI, and SSS-8) across all time points (W0, W4, and W8). Sequential reductions in GERD symptom scores and psychosomatic evaluations were observed during the initial eight weeks of treatment. Higher GERDQ (≥10) and SSS-8 (≥12) scores were predictive of refractory GERD (p = 0.004 and p = 0.009, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasizes the importance of considering physiological and psychological factors in the management of GERD. Psychosomatic evaluations provide valuable insights for assessing and treating GERD patients. Integrating stress management and comprehensive assessments into personalized treatment strategies is crucial.

Efficacy and Safety of Esomeprazole for the Treatment of Reflux Symptoms in Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

We investigated the efficacy of esomeprazole for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in a meta-analysis of clinical trials results.

Methods:

Medline, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for suitable studies, and double-blind, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were involved. A meta-analysis of RCTs was performed to analyze the efficacy of esomeprazole on clinical outcomes that associated with the severity of GERD.

Results:

A total of 8 clinical trials were selected in our meta-analysis (N=4495, patients with GERD). Esomeprazole treatment yielded a significant improvement in clinical signs and symptoms of GERD compared to placebo group. Funnel plot and Egger test showed there was no significant bias in the publication. Cochrane collaboration tool and Jadad scale were used to indicate that all 8 RCTs were of high quality. The results of Galbraith radial plot showed that no study was the major source of heterogeneity. Esomeprazole treatment significantly decreased the relapse rates more than that of placebo group (RR = 0.729; 95% CI: 0.670 to 0.794; P<0.001). It seems to be lower rates of heartburn (RR = 0.747; 95%CI: 0.665–0.839; P <0.001) and epigastric pain (RR = 0.795; 95%CI: 0.679–0.932; P =0.005) in esomeprazole-treated group compared with the placebo group. Moreover, serious adverse events was less likely to happen after esomeprazole therapy (RR = 1.406, 95% CI: 1.030–1.918; P =0.032).

Conclusion:

Compared with the control group, esomeprazole is a promising therapeutic agent that improves the management of patients with GERD.

Design characteristics of comparative effectiveness trials for the relief of symptomatic dyspepsia: A systematic review

Background

Dyspepsia represents a symptom domain rather than a diagnostic condition and covers a wide range of complex, underlying pathophysiologies that are not well understood. The review explores comparative effectiveness interventions for the treatment of symptomatic dyspepsia along a pragmatic-explanatory continuum. The aim is to identify relevant design characteristics applicable to future upper gastrointestinal comparative effectiveness research employing integrative medicine.

Methods

Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and WHO Clinical Trials were systematically searched until January 2019. Included articles were original research with two or more comparative intervention arms for the primary outcome; relief of symptomatic dyspepsia. Evaluation of the studies was conducted using the pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS-2) tool.

Results

Thirty-six articles were included in the review. A total of 68 Patient Reported Outcome Measurements (PROMs), utilizing 50 different formats were deployed across the studies. The appraisal process revealed eligibility, flexibility in adherence, flexibility in delivery and organization domains further aligned towards an explanatory design.

Conclusion

This review identified three design characteristics relevant for future comparative effectiveness research for the treatment of upper gastrointestinal disorders in a community setting. Extensive exclusion eligibility criteria limited the generalization of comparative effectiveness study results by removing sub-groups of the target populations more at risk of dyspeptic symptoms. The requirement for entry endoscopy was found to be common and not always pragmatically justifiable. Development of validated PROMs appropriate for a generic application to upper gastrointestinal disorders would be advantageous for future comparative effectiveness research within integrative medicine.

Laryngopharyngeal reflux: clinical significance, modern approaches to diagnosis and treatment

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common pathologies in modern clinical practice. Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is considered to be an extraesophageal manifestation of GERD and is characterized by retrograde ingestion of gastric content into the larynx and pharynx, leading to recurrent otolaryngological symptoms. Classical manifestations of LPR are hoarseness, perspiration, dryness and feeling of lump in the throat, coughing. There is no «gold standard» for the diagnosis of LPR. At the same time, several instrumental methods are used in clinical practice to verify the diagnosis: laryngoscopy and EGDS are the most common, and in some cases - 24-hour pH-metry and impedancemetry. In the case of an established diagnosis of LPR, it is recommended to use a standard dosage of PPI twice a day for 3–6 months.

Clinical efficacy of 60-mg dexlansoprazole and 40-mg esomeprazole after 24 weeks for the on-demand treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease grades A and B: a prospective randomized trial

Purpose: Research comparing the clinical efficacy of dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole has been limited. This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy of single doses of dexlansoprazole (modified-release 60 mg) and esomeprazole (40 mg) after 24-week follow-up in patients with mild erosive esophagitis. Methods: We enrolled 86 adult GERD subjects, randomized in a 1:1 ratio to two sequence groups defining the order in which they received single doses of dexlansoprazole (n=43) and esomeprazole (n=43) for 8 weeks as initial treatment. Patients displaying complete symptom resolution (CSR) by the end of initial treatment (8 weeks) were switched to on-demand therapy until the end of 24 weeks. Follow-up endoscopy was performed either at the end of 24 weeks or when severe reflux symptoms occurred. Five patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 81 patients (dexlansoprazole, n=41; esomeprazole, n=40) in the per-protocol analysis. Results: The GERDQ scores at 4-, 8-, 12-, 16-, 20-, and 24-week posttreatment were less than the baseline score. The CSR, rate of symptom relapse, days to symptom resolution, sustained healing rate of erosive esophagitis, treatment failure rate, and the number of tablets taken in 24 weeks were similar in both groups. The esomeprazole group had more days with reflux symptoms than the dexlansoprazole group (37.3±37.8 vs 53.9±54.2; P=0.008). In the dexlansoprazole group, patients exhibited persistent improvement in the GERDQ score during the on-demand period (week 8 vs week 24; P<0.001) but not in the esomeprazole group (week 8 vs week 24; P=0.846). Conclusions: This study suggests that the symptom relief effect for GERD after 24 weeks was similar for dexlansoprazole and esomeprazole. Dexlansoprazole exhibited fewer days with reflux symptoms in the 24-week study period, with better persistent improvement in the GERDQ score in the on-demand period. (ClinicalTrials. gov number: NCT03128736).