| Autor: |
Mackinnon M; Gastroenterology Unit, Flinders Medical Centre, SA., Alp M, Austad WI, Byrnes D, Cowen A, Duggan J, Pirola R, Thomas M, Ward M |
| Jazyk: |
angličtina |
| Zdroj: |
Australian and New Zealand journal of medicine [Aust N Z J Med] 1987 Jun; Vol. 17 (3), pp. 316-20. |
| DOI: |
10.1111/j.1445-5994.1987.tb01235.x |
| Abstrakt: |
This randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, multiclinic study of duodenal ulcer healing compared the efficacy and safety of enprostil with ranitidine. The six week trial admitted 164 patients with endoscopically demonstrated duodenal ulcer. Ratings of symptoms and adverse events were collated from patients' daily diaries, and endoscopy was repeated to verify healing after four weeks and, if appropriate, after six weeks. Medication used was enprostil (35 micrograms capsule) or ranitidine hydrochloride (150 mg tablet) with matching placebos twice daily. After six weeks, 81% of patients treated with enprostil and 95% of those treated with ranitidine had healed ulcers, a statistically significant difference (p = 0.007). There were no differences between treatment groups for the number of days until the daytime ulcer pain completely ceased. Night-time ulcer pain ceased significantly earlier in the group receiving ranitidine (p = 0.019) and was less severe during the week before the last visit (p = 0.001); daytime pain for ranitidine users was also less severe (p = 0.020) during this week. Mild to moderate adverse experiences were reported by 44% of enprostil and 35% of ranitidine patients. There were no severe adverse events. In conclusion, both enprostil and ranitidine were found to be safe and effective in the treatment of duodenal ulcer. However, the ranitidine regimen used in this trial produced better results than the enprostil regimen. |
| Databáze: |
MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text