Asymptomatic duodenal ulcers occurring during maintenance treatment with ranitidine

Fifty-seven patients who developed asymptomatic recurrence of duodenal ulceration during maintenance treatment with ranitidine were followed up to assess the risk of developing symptoms or complications of ulcer disease. The risk of development of symptomatic ulcer recurrence was 4% in the first year of follow-up during continuous maintenance treatment, irrespective of whether or not the asymptomatic ulcer had been actively treated (by doubling the dose of ranitidine used for maintenance therapy). The asymptomatic duodenal ulceration during maintenance treatment did not predispose to complications such as haemorrhage or perforation. It seems, therefore, that patients receiving maintenance treatment for duodenal ulceration do not require endoscopic re-examination unless symptoms have recurred, because the asymptomatic recurrences of duodenal ulceration occurring during maintenance treatment are clinically benign, usually heal spontaneously if maintenance treatment is continued, and do not require active medical intervention.     

Long-term maintenance treatment of gastric ulcers with ranitidine

One hundred and twenty patients with gastric ulcer disease, who had been receiving maintenance treatment with ranitidine (150 or 300 mg/day) for periods up to 7 years, were studied retrospectively. The proportion of patients remaining free from symptomatic recurrence of ulcer during maintenance treatment was 97% after 1 year; 90% after 3 years; and 79% after 5 years. No patient developed haemorrhage or perforation during maintenance treatment. None of the demographic features was shown to be associated with a significantly increased risk of ulcer recurrence during maintenance treatment. Comparison of the recurrence rates during maintenance treatment with those during periods without active anti-ulcer therapy, using life table and incidence density analysis, showed a significant difference in favour of maintenance treatment. We conclude that maintenance treatment with ranitidine for 5 years significantly reduces the risk of symptomatic ulcer recurrence in patients with gastric ulcer.     

Ranitidine maintenance treatment of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced duodenal ulceration

Fifty-six patients who presented with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated duodenal ulcers received maintenance treatment with ranitidine. Forty-eight of these patients stopped treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The cumulative symptomatic remission at the end of 5 years of maintenance treatment was 97.7%. While half the patients had presented with haemorrhage from the ulcer, only one patient bled during maintenance treatment, giving a cumulative risk of 2.3% in 5 years of maintenance treatment. We conclude that maintenance treatment with ranitidine effectively and safely keeps patients with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugassociated ulcers symptom- and risk-free.     

A placebo-controlled investigation of duodenal ulcer recurrence after withdrawal of long-term treatment with ranitidine

Ninety-two patients with duodenal ulcer disease, who had received long-term continuous treatment with ranitidine for an average of 7.5 years, participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study to determine whether stopping ranitidine resulted in ulcer recurrence. Patients were randomized to continue with ranitidine (n= 46) or to receive placebo (n= 46) and were followed up for six months. Treatment failure was defined as the first symptomatic recurrence of ulcer. The occurrence of epigastric pain during the follow-up period was significantly less frequent in the ranitidine group (13%) than in the placebo group (43%) (P= 0.001). At six months, 9% of the ranitidine group had developed ulcer recurrence, compared with 48 % in the placebo group (P < 0.001, logrank test). Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model showed that younger age (P= 0.041) and a long history of ulcer disease (P= 0.025) were risk factors for ulcer recurrence but gender, smoking and duration or dose of previous ranitidine treatment were not predictive of relapse during treatment with placebo. In conclusion, withdrawal of ranitidine after more than five years of continuous treatment results in almost half of the patients developing symptomatic ulcer recurrence within six months. Thus, long-term continuous therapy does not alter the natural history of duodenal ulcer disease. Younger patients and those with a long history of ulcer disease appear to be at increased risk of developing ulcer recurrence if long-term treatment is withdrawn.     

Intragastric pH monitoring in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and the effect of intravenous cimetidine and ranitidine

Intragastric pH was measured continuously from 1800 to 1200 hours the following day in 22 duodenal ulcer patients and in eight gastric ulcer patients, all of whom had been admitted as emergencies with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. The effects of intravenous cimetidine or ranitidine were compared with no treatment. In patients with duodenal ulcer, median intragastric pH was 1.8 (range 1.0-4.9) in the group receiving no treatment. In the cimetidine group (400 mg, 6-hourly, n = 8) median pH was 4.7 (range 1.5-7.7) and after ranitidine (50 mg, 6-hourly, n = 10) it was 3.8 (range 1.2-7.8). The pH remained above 4.0 for 67% of the recording time with cimetidine, 47% with ranitidine and for only 3% with placebo. Intragastric pH in gastric ulcer patients without treatment was higher (median 3.4, range 1.0-6.9) than in duodenal ulcer patients with treatment. Both H2 antagonists raised intragastric pH in patients with gastric ulcer and maintained a gastric pH of greater than 4.0 for at least 50% of the time. Presently recommended i.v. doses of cimetidine and ranitidine do not consistently maintain gastric pH above 4.0 for long periods in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding.     

Ranitidine: a pharmacoeconomic evaluation of its use in acid-related disorders

Ranitidine is a histamine H 2-receptor antagonist which, on the basis of its well established tolerability and efficacy profile, has been widely prescribed for the treatment of ulcer disease and mild to moderate reflux oesophagitis. However, the advent of more powerful gastric acid inhibitors (e.g. acid pump inhibitors) and the realisation of the role of Helicobactor pylori infection in duodenal ulcer disease could have considerable clinical and economic implications for the use of ranitidine (and other H 2-receptor antagonists). Simulation modelling studies based on current pricing policies in Europe predict that ranitidine-based treatment will be less cost effective than omeprazole in the short term healing of duodenal ulcer and reflux oesophagitis disease. During longer term treatment, omeprazole is expected to be the dominating strategy over ranitidine-based therapy in Europe and the US. However, the inherent limitations of modelling studies reinforce the need for randomised prospective trials, preferably conducted in a general practice setting and including a quality-of-life analysis. Of the currently accepted approaches for the long term management of recurrent duodenal ulcer disease, daily maintenance therapy with ranitidine has been shown to be more cost effective than intermittent treatment for up to 2 years in the US. The annual cost of providing continuous maintenance therapy with ranitidine 150 mg/day is higher than with cimetidine 400 mg/day, although the extra benefits include a reduced risk of pain and discomfort from an expected lower rate of ulcer recurrence with ranitidine. Simultaneous ulcer healing and eradication of H. pylori markedly reduces relapse rates and is likely to become the management strategy of choice in H. pylori-positive patients, particularly with the advent of more convenient, well tolerated and effective regimens. Moreover, widespread clinical acceptance of H. pylori eradication may yield substantial cost savings to society by reducing the overall need for long term antisecretory therapy. Nonetheless, maintenance therapy with histamine H 2-receptor antagonists remains indicated for patients at high risk of ulcer recurrence who are poorly responsive to or cannot tolerate H. pylori eradication regimens. In summary, the proven efficacy and tolerability of ranitidine will ensure its continued use in the treatment of many patients with duodenal ulcer and mild to moderate reflux oesophagitis. However, there is increasing clinical and economic data favouring the selection of omeprazole in patients with more severe symptoms of these diseases.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

A comparison of low-dose maintenance treatment with enprostil against ranitidine in the prevention of duodenal ulcer recurrence

Enprostil, a prostaglandin E2 analogue, is effective in healing acute duodenal ulcer but its value in preventing recurrence, when given daily for maintenance therapy, is uncertain. In this three-centre study we compared enprostil and ranitidine maintenance therapy; the latter is known to reduce duodenal ulcer relapse rates. Patients whose duodenal ulcers had been healed by treatment with an H2-receptor antagonist were randomized to receive single-blind treatment with either 35 micrograms enprostil (n = 64) or 150 mg ranitidine (n = 64) at bedtime for periods of up to 1 year. Endoscopy was routinely performed at 3 months at one centre, and at 6 and 12 months at all three centres, or whenever ulcer symptoms recurred. Clinical assessment and laboratory investigations were performed every 3 months. Relapse, defined as recurrent ulcer with or without pain, or erosions with pain, was significantly greater in patients on enprostil, the comparative rates at 3, 6 and 12 months were: enprostil 23, 31 and 36% ranitidine 6, 12 and 17% (P = 0.013; P = 0.03 and P = 0.03, respectively). Thirty-one patients reported adverse events, the most common being headache (enprostil = 6, ranitidine = 2) and mild diarrhoea (enprostil = 6, ranitidine = 0). Four patients on enprostil were withdrawn for adverse events, although none terminated because of diarrhoea. There were no clinically significant changes in haematology or biochemistry. Enprostil may reduce duodenal ulcer relapse but at a dose of 35 micrograms nightly, it is less effective than 150 mg ranitidine nightly.     

Short report: long-term management of peptic ulcer disease with ranitidine in Germany

One hundred and twenty-five patients with duodenal ulcer disease were given continuous ranitidine therapy after initial acute healing. Cumulative remission rates indicated that 95 % of patients were ulcer-free after 1 year, 89% at 2 years, 81% at 3 years, 70% at 4 years and 60% at 5 and 6 years. Nine patients had a second recurrence after healing of the first. No patient developed an ulcer complication. These results support the view that long-term continuous ranitidine therapy prevents ulcer recurrence and complications.     

Lansoprazole is superior to ranitidine as maintenance treatment for the prevention of duodenal ulcer relapse

AIM: To compare lansoprazole 30 mg once daily, lansoprazole 15 mg once daily and ranitidine 150 mg once nightly in the prevention of duodenal ulcer relapse in patients whose duodenal ulcers had been previously healed with lansoprazole 30 mg once daily or ranitidine 300 mg nightly. METHODS: A double-blind, parallel group, randomized multicentre study conducted in 33 centres in the UK, Eire, Sweden and Australia. Two hundred and nineteen patients with a duodenal ulcer were randomized to receive lansoprazole 30 mg and 217 to receive ranitidine 300 mg for 8 weeks. Patients were then re-randomized to receive lansoprazole 30 mg (122 patients), lansoprazole 15 mg (121 patients) or ranitidine 150 mg (116 patients) for 12 months. All patients had an endoscopically-proven duodenal ulcer at baseline and were considered suitable for long-term maintenance therapy to prevent relapse. RESULTS: Significantly more patients were healed on lansoprazole (98%) compared to ranitidine (89%) (P < 0.001, Fisher's exact test). Lansoprazole provided more rapid symptom relief than ranitidine. Lansoprazole 30 mg and lansoprazole 15 mg increased the probability of not relapsing in comparison to ranitidine (P = 0.001 and 0.06, respectively, life-table analysis). Relapse rates over the 12 months were lower in the lansoprazole treatment groups (lansoprazole 30 mg, 5%; lansoprazole 15 mg, 12%; and ranitidine, 21%; lansoprazole 30 mg vs. ranitidine 150 mg, P = 0.002). Symptoms were well controlled in both groups during the maintenance phase. All treatments were well tolerated with no major differences seen in adverse event profiles between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both doses of lansoprazole (30 mg and 15 mg) were superior to ranitidine 150 mg in the prevention of duodenal ulcer relapse. Lansoprazole was superior to ranitidine in terms of symptom control and duodenal ulcer healing. Both treatments were well tolerated.     

Maintenance therapy for prevention of recurrent peptic ulcers

Peptic ulcer disease is a chronic, relapsing disease. Successful healing of duodenal and gastric ulcers with antacids, cimetidine, ranitidine, famotidine, or sucralfate is frequently followed by ulcer recurrence. The need for long-term, low-dose maintenance therapy is based on disease severity, ulcer history, complications, therapeutic intervention, response to treatment, and potential risk factors. Comparison of ulcer maintenance trials requires consideration of important factors such as frequency of endoscopy, duration of follow-up period, and the method used to calculate ulcer recurrence rates. Clinical trials indicate that chronic treatment with low-dose cimetidine, ranitidine, famotidine, and probably sucralfate decreases the frequency of duodenal ulcer recurrence and that ranitidine may be superior to cimetidine. Preliminary studies indicate that higher doses of these same medications may be required to prevent gastric ulcer recurrence. Long-term maintenance therapy with these agents must be continuous in order to prevent relapses, but treatment should be limited to one year because of unknown consequences beyond this period.     

Review article: maintenance treatment with H2-receptor antagonists for peptic ulcer disease

In recent years a number of different strategies for managing patients with peptic ulcer disease have become available. The present review discusses the relative merits of each form of treatment. Intermittent treatment (whether given in response to symptoms or as a prophylactic regimen prescribed seasonally or at weekends) fails to prevent ulcer recurrence and leaves patients at risk of haemorrhage and perforation. Anti-Helicobacter pylori therapy, although useful in certain circumstances, cannot be recommended for all patients with ulcer disease because of side effects and, in any case, requires further assessment of efficacy. Gastric surgery reduces ulcer recurrence and complications, but operations which have a low incidence of side effects are associated with higher rates of ulcer recurrence, particularly when patients are followed up for more than 10 years. Long-term continuous maintenance treatment with H2-receptor antagonists for 5 or more years effectively prevents ulcer recurrence in the majority of patients and significantly reduces the risk of ulcer complications. In addition, maintenance treatment has proved to be safe and is well tolerated by patients. Maintenance treatment with H2-receptor antagonists is the preferred option for the management of patients with peptic ulcer disease.     

Omeprazole: a pharmacoeconomic evaluation of its use in duodenal ulcer and reflux oesophagitis

Omeprazole regulates gastric acid secretion and is an effective treatment of acute duodenal ulcer and reflux oesophagitis, achieving more rapid healing and symptomatic relief than histamine H 2-receptor antagonists. When administered as maintenance therapy, omeprazole reduces the incidence of relapse. The drug is also highly effective in patients poorly responsive to histamine H 2-receptor antagonists. The daily acquisition cost of omeprazole is higher than that of histamine H 2-receptor antagonists in many countries, and thus it is important to evaluate the pharmacoeconomic impact of omeprazole in the short and long term treatment of duodenal ulcer and reflux oesophagitis. Pharmacoeconomic analyses have been performed in several clinical settings using pooled data from clinical trials or simulated models of clinical practice. In a single analysis using Finnish cost data, omeprazole was more cost effective than ranitidine in the treatment of duodenal ulcer disease over a 6-month period. The cost effectiveness of omeprazole was comparable to that of sucralfate-containing regimens, with patients receiving omeprazole being healed more quickly and experiencing a greater number of healthy days. Using a computer-model simulation and Swedish cost data, omeprazole was more cost effective than ranitidine when administered as intermittent treatment of duodenal ulcer over 5 years. Preliminary reports indicate that regimens which eradicate Helicobacter pylori are more cost effective than those which do not. As short term treatment of reflux oesophagitis, omeprazole 20 to 40 mg/day was the dominating treatment strategy, being less costly and more effective than ranitidine 300 to 1200 mg/day. Omeprazole 20 mg/day produced symptom-free days more cost effectively than either cimetidine 1.6 g/day or ranitidine 300 mg/day. More importantly, as long term (maintenance or intermittent) treatment of reflux oesophagitis, omeprazole 20 mg/day was more cost effective than both ranitidine 150 mg twice daily and 'phase 1' therapy (diet and antacids) over 6 and 12 months. Thus, based on analyses evaluated, omeprazole appears to be more cost effective than ranitidine in the short term treatment of duodenal ulcer. Results for long term treatment are less clear cut, but full details from some studies are not yet available. For the short term treatment of reflux oesophagitis omeprazole is more cost effective than ranitidine or cimetidine and for long term treatment omeprazole is more cost effective than ranitidine. As treatment for reflux oesophagitis, omeprazole is considered to be the dominating treatment strategy.     

Gastric histology and plasma gastrin response to a meal in patients with duodenal ulcer disease after five years treatment with ranitidine

Fifty asymptomatic patients with duodenal ulcer disease, aged 31-82 years, who had received ranitidine maintenance therapy continuously for five or more years without a symptomatic recurrence, were studied. Fasting plasma gastrin concentrations were normal (mean 24 pmol/L, S.D. +/- 22) while the post-prandial gastrin response was variable with maximum plasma concentrations ranging from 16 to 309 pmol/L. Endoscopy revealed six asymptomatic peptic ulcers. Histological examination of gastric biopsies showed mild, superficial inflammatory cell infiltration of the fundic mucosa, but more extensive inflammatory cell infiltration with some atrophy of the mucosal glands in the antral mucosa. Patchy intestinal metaplasia was evident in the antral mucosa of 18 patients. No fundic ECL cell hyperplasia was seen. Helicobacter pylori were detected in the corpus and antrum of most patients. These results suggest that maintenance treatment with ranitidine for 5 years is not associated with either significant hypergastrinaemia or with changes in the fundic mucosa which could be interpreted as pre-malignant.     

Review article: asymptomatic duodenal ulcers—implications of heterogeneity

The present review examines the evidence for the existence of an asymptomatic variant of duodenal ulcer disease, as well as its clinical significance and therapeutic implications. Asymptomatic duodenal ulcers have definitely been shown to occur only in patients treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and in patients who have previously suffered from ulcer disease, especially if the latter have been subjected to gastric surgery or are receiving long-term continuous (maintenance) treatment with drugs. It seems likely (although conclusive evidence is not yet available) that NSAID-associated asymptomatic duodenal ulcers are predisposed to haemorrhage or perforation and should therefore be healed and kept in remission. Asymptomatic duodenal ulcers discovered during maintenance treatment appear to be clinically innocuous and do not therefore indicate therapeutic failure, nor require modification of therapy.     

Can higher doses of an H2-receptor antagonist accelerate duodenal ulcer healing?

Drugs that inhibit gastric acid secretion heal duodenal ulcers at a rate that correlates with the ability of individual treatment regimens to decrease 24-h intragastric acidity. As current therapeutic regimens of ranitidine decrease 24-h intragastric acidity submaximally, higher dosages may expedite duodenal ulcer healing. To test this hypothesis a randomized, double-blind clinical trial was conducted in 245 patients with duodenal ulcer to compare the effects of standard dose (300 mg nocte) and high-dose (300 mg q.d.s.) ranitidine. Patients were assessed after 2 weeks of treatment and, if unhealed, after a further 2 weeks of therapy. The therapeutic gain in ulcer healing at the 2-week endoscopy of the higher dose over the lower dose of ranitidine was 22% (68% vs 46%, P less than 0.001). The cumulative ulcer healing rates at the 4-week endoscopy were 88% and 92% for the standard and high-dose ranitidine groups, respectively (N.S.). By 2 weeks, 61% of patients treated with standard ranitidine therapy and 79% of those receiving 300 mg ranitidine q.d.s. were pain-free (P less than 0.01). A further 2 weeks of therapy enabled 88% and 97% of patients (N.S.) to become pain-free on these two regimens, respectively. The drug regimens were equally well tolerated. Thus higher-dose ranitidine can significantly accelerate the healing of duodenal ulcer with improvement in pain relief.     

Decision analysis of histamine H2-receptor antagonist maintenance therapy versus Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy: a randomised controlled trial in patients with continuing pain after duodenal ulcer

BACKGROUND: Much has been published on the efficacy and cost effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment as an alternative to histamine H2-receptor antagonist maintenance treatment in peptic ulcer disease. However, most studies have analysed and emphasised H. pylori eradication rates rather than management/control of symptoms and the associated cost savings. Although H. pylori eradication therapy is very successful in clearing the infection, dyspeptic symptoms may persist and management of these can be expensive. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the cost implications in controlling symptoms using either H2-receptor antagonist maintenance therapy or H. pylori eradication therapy in patients with duodenal ulcer disease. DESIGN: This was a non-blind, prospective, randomised, parallel-group study comparing maintenance H2-receptor antagonist treatment using ranitidine with H. pylori eradication therapy, with a 1-year follow-up. SETTING: This was a study of outpatients from general practices in Dundee, Scotland, or the Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, gastroenterology clinic. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: 119 patients with confirmed duodenal ulcer, free from active ulceration at study entry but positive for H. pylori infection, who were receiving maintenance H2-receptor antagonist therapy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised to receive either continuing maintenance therapy with ranitidine (initially 150 mg daily; 58 patients) or H. pylori eradication therapy using an omeprazole/amoxicillin/metronidazole regimen (or omeprazole/clarithromycin if allergic to penicillin). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: Overall, H. pylori eradication rates were 100% per protocol and 95.1% intention-to-treat. At completion of 1 year of follow-up, 12 of the 61 (19.7%) patients successfully eradicated of H. pylori were still dependent on acid suppression for symptom relief. H. pylori eradication treatment was the least-cost strategy in managing/controlling symptoms at 1 year (168 Pounds vs 210 Pounds per patient; 1996 values). However, over time, post-eradication treatment costs were greater than H2-receptor antagonist therapy costs. Any potential savings were directly related to the proportion of patients needing further treatment post-eradication, the cost of endoscopy and the urea breath test. CONCLUSIONS: If dyspepsia persists long term, H. pylori eradication treatment may not be the least-cost option for patients with duodenal ulcer.     

A controlled study of 20 mg famotidine nocte vs. 150 mg ranitidine nocte for the prevention of duodenal ulcer relapse

A 24-week, double-blind, randomized study at 13 centres compared the efficacy and safety of 20 mg famotidine nocte and 150 mg ranitidine h.s. for the prevention of duodenal ulcer recurrence. All participants had been successfully treated for an acute duodenal ulcer with 40 mg famotidine nocte. Patients were endoscoped at baseline and at 24 weeks, unless symptoms warranted earlier examination: of the 208 patients enrolled, 86 who received famotidine and 84 who received ranitidine met all protocol criteria and were considered evaluable. Intention to treat and per protocol analyses showed non-significant trends in favour of famotidine (P = 0.44 and 0.16, respectively). During the 24-week observation period, 16.3% of the famotidine group and 25% of the ranitidine group had an ulcer recurrence (95% CI of percentage difference -0.22 + 0.04). At 24 weeks, relief of day and night pain was reported by 81.2% and 91.8% of the famotidine-treated patients, respectively. The corresponding figures in the ranitidine group were 73.5% and 85.5%. No laboratory abnormalities related to the study-drugs were noted and only two drug related (possibly or probably) adverse experiences were reported, both in the famotidine group. The data from this study therefore, supports the conclusion that the efficacy of 20 mg famotidine nocte is comparable to that of ranitidine in preventing duodenal ulcer recurrence, with comparable tolerability for long-term therapy.     

High-dose ranitidine for the prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer disease in rheumatoid arthritis patients taking NSAIDs.

BACKGROUND: Continuous therapy with low-dose ranitidine (150 mg b.d.) is known to be effective for the prevention of recurrent nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-associated duodenal ulcer but not for gastric ulcer. AIM: To investigate, in a double-blind placebo- controlled study, the preventive effect of a high dose of ranitidine (300 mg b.d.) on the recurrence of both duodenal ulcers and gastric ulcers in rheumatoid arthritis patients with a continuous need for NSAIDs. METHODS: Rheumatoid arthritis patients with a history of peptic ulcer disease were randomized to receive either ranitidine 300 mg b.d. or placebo for 12 months. Endoscopy was performed at study entry and after 6 and 12 months. End-point was the recurrence of gastric or duodenal ulcers. RESULTS: The study was stopped after a blinded interim analysis; at that time 10 of the 15 included patients in each treatment group were evaluable. Recurrent duodenal ulcers had occurred in four patients treated with placebo and none of the patients treated with ranitidine (Fisher's exact one-tailed P = 0.04; 95% CI, - 0.70 to - 0.10). Recurrent gastric ulcers had occurred in six patients in the placebo group and three patients in the ranitidine group (Fisher's exact one-tailed P = 0.18; 95% CI, -0.72 to 0.12). Two patients in the placebo group had developed both duodenal ulcers and gastric ulcers. No adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: High dose ranitidine is effective for the prevention of recurrent duodenal ulcer but not for recurrent gastric ulcer in rheumatoid arthritis patients taking NSAIDs.     

Peptic ulcer in the elderly—a double-blind, short-term study comparing nizatidine 300 mg with ranitidine 300 mg

This was a randomized, double-blind, multicentre, short-term study comparing ranitidine and nizatidine at the standard dosages of 300 mg at bedtime. In 49 centres in Italy, all peptic ulcer patients aged over 65 years and with endoscopically documented acute disease were considered eligible for the study. Clinical check-ups were repeated every 3 weeks, while the endoscopic and biochemical assessments were scheduled at 6 and (in unhealed patients) 12 weeks. Statistics: chi-squared test, Fisher's exact test, Student t-test for unpaired data. The study included 170 duodenal ulcer and 75 gastric ulcer patients. Of these, 83/17 duodenal ulcer and 38/75 gastric ulcer patients were treated with nizatidine 300 mg and the remainder with ranitidine 300 mg. The groups were well-matched for common clinical data. Eight patients dropped out. Healing rates at 6 and 12 weeks were 81.9% and 91.5% for nizatidine-treated duodenal ulcer patients versus 78.1% and 94.2% for ranitidinetreated duodenal ulcer cases (P: N.S.); 6 and 12-week healing rates were 76.3% and 89.5% for nizatidinetreated gastric ulcer patients versus 67.6% and 83.8% for ranitidine-treated gastric ulcer patients (P: N.S.). No slow healing risk factors were found. Only minor adverse events were registered. In conclusion: ranitidine 300 mg and nizatidine 300 mg both proved effective and safe in the treatment of acute peptic ulceration in the elderly.