Comparison of intravenous pantoprazole and ranitidine in patients with dyspepsia presented to the emergency department: a randomized, double blind, controlled trial

Relevance of early management by proton-pump inhibitor in acute upper gastro-intestinal tract disorder: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) are frequently used in the emergency and general practice settings in several clinical presentations linked to acute upper gastro-intestinal tract disorders as abdominal or chest pain without recommendations.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this scoping review was to assess pain reduction, diagnostic performance, and safety in the first 24 h-management in primary care or emergency medicine.

METHODS

Search was realized by 2 independent reviewers in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Only original articles or systematic reviews in English were included. Studies about chronic and/or bleeding conditions, therapeutic cocktails and studies without pain evaluation were excluded. Two methodologies were used for bias estimation.

RESULTS

From 4442 titles, 79 full-text articles were assessed, and 9 were included. There is no strong evidence supporting the use of PPI as a first line analgesic or diagnostic test in acute syndromes linked to acute upper gastro-intestinal tract disorder. A small effect in pain reduction was retrieved in patients with low pain scores. A poor additional value in patients with gastric reflux, and a low specificity compared to other diagnostic tests were observed. A short-term PPI administration appears to be safe with low risk of serious allergic reactions, and poor adverse effects (moderate evidence).

CONCLUSION

Although PPIs may contribute to the multimodal analgesia in acute settings, with few and/or minor side effects, no recommendation can be drawn for their use as a primary analgesic. Data regarding the relevance of the PPI test are much less clear, no data regarding care pathways are available.

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.