On-demand Versus Continuous Maintenance Treatment With a Proton Pump Inhibitor for Mild Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study.

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Da Hyun Jung, Young Hoon Youn, Hye-Kyung Jung, Seung Young Kim, Cheal Wung Huh, Cheol Min Shin, Jung-Hwan Oh, Kyu Chan Huh, Moo In Park, Suck Chei Choi, Ki Bae Kim, Seon-Young Park, Joong Goo Kwon, Yu Kyung Cho, Jung Ho Park, Jeong Eun Shin, Eun Jeong Gong, Jae Hak Kim, Su Jin Hong, Hyun Jin Kim, Sam Ryong Jee, Ju Yup Lee, Kee Wook Jung, Hee Man Kim, Kwang Jae Lee
{"title":"On-demand Versus Continuous Maintenance Treatment With a Proton Pump Inhibitor for Mild Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study.","authors":"Da Hyun Jung,&nbsp;Young Hoon Youn,&nbsp;Hye-Kyung Jung,&nbsp;Seung Young Kim,&nbsp;Cheal Wung Huh,&nbsp;Cheol Min Shin,&nbsp;Jung-Hwan Oh,&nbsp;Kyu Chan Huh,&nbsp;Moo In Park,&nbsp;Suck Chei Choi,&nbsp;Ki Bae Kim,&nbsp;Seon-Young Park,&nbsp;Joong Goo Kwon,&nbsp;Yu Kyung Cho,&nbsp;Jung Ho Park,&nbsp;Jeong Eun Shin,&nbsp;Eun Jeong Gong,&nbsp;Jae Hak Kim,&nbsp;Su Jin Hong,&nbsp;Hyun Jin Kim,&nbsp;Sam Ryong Jee,&nbsp;Ju Yup Lee,&nbsp;Kee Wook Jung,&nbsp;Hee Man Kim,&nbsp;Kwang Jae Lee","doi":"10.5056/jnm23130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>It remains unclear which maintenance treatment modality is most appropriate for mild gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We aimed to compare on-demand treatment with continuous treatment using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in the maintenance treatment for patients with non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients whose GERD symptoms improved after 4 weeks of standard dose PPI treatment were prospectively enrolled at 25 hospitals. Subsequently, the enrolled patients were randomly assigned to either an on-demand or a continuous maintenance treatment group, and followed in an 8-week interval for up to 24 weeks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 304 patients were randomized to maintenance treatment (continuous, n = 151 vs on-demand, n = 153). The primary outcome, the overall proportion of unwillingness to continue the assigned maintenance treatment modality, failed to confirm the non-inferiority of on-demand treatment (45.9%) compared to continuous treatment (36.1%). Compared with the on-demand group, the GERD symptom and health-related quality of life scores significantly more improved and the overall satisfaction score was significantly higher in the continuous treatment group, particularly at week 8 and week 16 of maintenance treatment. Work impairment scores were not different in the 2 groups, but the prescription cost was less in the on-demand group. Serum gastrin levels significantly elevated in the continuous treatment group, but not in the on-demand group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Continuous treatment seems to be more appropriate for the initial maintenance treatment of non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis than on-demand treatment. Stepping down to on-demand treatment needs to be considered after a sufficient period of continuous treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10577461/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5056/jnm23130","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/aims: It remains unclear which maintenance treatment modality is most appropriate for mild gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). We aimed to compare on-demand treatment with continuous treatment using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in the maintenance treatment for patients with non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis.

Methods: Patients whose GERD symptoms improved after 4 weeks of standard dose PPI treatment were prospectively enrolled at 25 hospitals. Subsequently, the enrolled patients were randomly assigned to either an on-demand or a continuous maintenance treatment group, and followed in an 8-week interval for up to 24 weeks.

Results: A total of 304 patients were randomized to maintenance treatment (continuous, n = 151 vs on-demand, n = 153). The primary outcome, the overall proportion of unwillingness to continue the assigned maintenance treatment modality, failed to confirm the non-inferiority of on-demand treatment (45.9%) compared to continuous treatment (36.1%). Compared with the on-demand group, the GERD symptom and health-related quality of life scores significantly more improved and the overall satisfaction score was significantly higher in the continuous treatment group, particularly at week 8 and week 16 of maintenance treatment. Work impairment scores were not different in the 2 groups, but the prescription cost was less in the on-demand group. Serum gastrin levels significantly elevated in the continuous treatment group, but not in the on-demand group.

Conclusions: Continuous treatment seems to be more appropriate for the initial maintenance treatment of non-erosive GERD or mild erosive esophagitis than on-demand treatment. Stepping down to on-demand treatment needs to be considered after a sufficient period of continuous treatment.

质子泵抑制剂治疗轻度胃食管反流病的按需与持续维持治疗:一项前瞻性随机多中心研究。
背景/目的:目前尚不清楚哪种维持治疗方式最适合轻度胃食管反流病(GERD)。我们的目的是比较质子泵抑制剂(PPI)在非糜烂性胃食管反流病或轻度糜烂性食管炎患者维持治疗中的按需治疗和持续治疗。方法:在25家医院前瞻性地招募接受标准剂量PPI治疗4周后GERD症状改善的患者。随后,入选患者被随机分配到按需或持续维持治疗组,并以8周为间隔进行随访,随访时间长达24周。结果:共有304名患者随机接受维持治疗(持续治疗,n=151,按需治疗,n=153)。主要结果,即不愿意继续指定的维持治疗模式的总体比例,未能证实按需治疗(45.9%)与持续治疗(36.1%)相比的非劣效性,持续治疗组的GERD症状和健康相关生活质量评分显著改善,总体满意度评分显著更高,尤其是在维持治疗的第8周和第16周。两组的工作障碍评分没有差异,但按需用药组的处方费用较低。持续治疗组的血清胃泌素水平显著升高,但按需治疗组没有。结论:对于非糜烂性胃食管反流病或轻度糜烂性食管炎的初始维持治疗,持续治疗似乎比按需治疗更合适。在经过足够长的连续治疗后,需要考虑逐步接受按需治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信