BACKGROUND: It has been reported that inhibitors of gastric acid secretion prevent bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection for mucosal gastric neoplasm. However, uncertain whether an histamine2-receptor antagonist or proton-pump inhibitor is more effective. AIM: To evaluate prospectively the effectiveness of famotidine or omeprazole for ulcer management after endoscopic mucosal resection. METHODS:From July 2003 to October 2004, 57 patients were randomly assigned to famotidine or omeprazole for the management of endoscopic mucosal resection. Both drugs were given intravenously for the first 2 days, thereafter by mouth. The bleeding rates after endoscopic mucosal resection, the effects on the healing of endoscopic mucosal resection-induced ulceration, and cost-benefits were compared. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients received famotidine and 29 received omeprazole. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in patient characteristics. The bleeding rates after endoscopic mucosal resection were not significantly different (18% vs. 14%) between the groups. Similarly, no differences were seen in the size of the endoscopic mucosal resection-induced ulceration at 1, 30 and 60 days after resection between groups. The total costs of anti-secretory agents demonstrated a significant cost-benefit to those treated with famotidine (10,420 yen vs. 17,782 yen). CONCLUSIONS:Famotidine is suggested as a better alternative to omeprazole for the management of endoscopic mucosal resection, as it showed a clear cost-benefit, and the healing results after endoscopic mucosal resection were similar for the two treatment strategies.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: It has been reported that inhibitors of gastric acid secretion prevent bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection for mucosal gastric neoplasm. However, uncertain whether an histamine2-receptor antagonist or proton-pump inhibitor is more effective. AIM: To evaluate prospectively the effectiveness of famotidine or omeprazole for ulcer management after endoscopic mucosal resection. METHODS: From July 2003 to October 2004, 57 patients were randomly assigned to famotidine or omeprazole for the management of endoscopic mucosal resection. Both drugs were given intravenously for the first 2 days, thereafter by mouth. The bleeding rates after endoscopic mucosal resection, the effects on the healing of endoscopic mucosal resection-induced ulceration, and cost-benefits were compared. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients received famotidine and 29 received omeprazole. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in patient characteristics. The bleeding rates after endoscopic mucosal resection were not significantly different (18% vs. 14%) between the groups. Similarly, no differences were seen in the size of the endoscopic mucosal resection-induced ulceration at 1, 30 and 60 days after resection between groups. The total costs of anti-secretory agents demonstrated a significant cost-benefit to those treated with famotidine (10,420 yen vs. 17,782 yen). CONCLUSIONS:Famotidine is suggested as a better alternative to omeprazole for the management of endoscopic mucosal resection, as it showed a clear cost-benefit, and the healing results after endoscopic mucosal resection were similar for the two treatment strategies.
Authors: Hong Jun Park; Hyun-Soo Kim; Bo Ra Kim; So Yeon Park; Jin Heon Hong; Ki Won Jo; Jae Woo Kim Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2012-10-12 Impact factor: 3.199