The efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in nonulcer dyspepsia: a systematic review and economic analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The evidence that proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy affects symptoms of nonulcer dyspepsia is conflicting. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate whether PPI therapy had any effect in nonulcer dyspepsia and constructed a health economic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of this approach. METHODS: Electronic searches were performed using the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SIGLE until September 2002. Dyspepsia outcomes were dichotomized into cured/improved versus same/worse. Results were incorporated into a Markov model comparing health service costs and benefits of PPI with antacid therapy over 1 year. RESULTS: Eight trials were identified that compared PPI therapy with placebo in 3293 patients. The relative risk of remaining dyspeptic with PPI therapy versus placebo was .86 (95% confidence interval, .78-.95; P = .003, random-effects model) with a number needed to treat of 9 (95% confidence interval, 5-25). There was statistically significant heterogeneity between trials (heterogeneity chi(2) = 30.05; df = 7; P < .001). The PPI strategy would cost an extra US dollar 278/month free from dyspepsia if the drug cost US dollar 90/month. If a generic price of US dollar 19.99 is used, then a PPI strategy costs an extra US dollar 57/month free from dyspepsia. A third-party payer would be 95% certain that PPI therapy would be cost-effective, provided they were willing to pay US dollar 94/month free from dyspepsia. CONCLUSIONS: PPI therapy may be a cost-effective therapy in nonulcer dyspepsia, provided generic prices are used.     

Who provides gastrointestinal endoscopy in Canada?

PURPOSE: To determine who provides gastrointestinal endoscopy in Canada and to understand provincial and regional differences in endoscopy providers. METHODS: Aggregate physician sociodemographic and activity data for 2002 were obtained from the Canadian Institute of Health Information's National Physician Database. Physicians were classified as gastroenterologists, general surgeons and others. RESULTS: In 2002, 1444 physicians, including 735 surgeons, 551 gastroenterologists and 158 others, performed at least 100 colonoscopies or 100 gastroscopies. Gastroenterologists performed 53% of all colonoscopies and 59% of all gastroscopies. Gastroenterologists were the primary providers of colonoscopies in large urban areas, whereas surgeons were the primary providers in smaller urban and rural areas. An average of 317 colonoscopies were performed by surgeons, 516 by gastroenterologists and 203 by other physicians. The proportion of surgeon colonoscopists in each province ranged from 47% to 71%. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons and gastroenterologists are the major providers of gastrointestinal endoscopy in Canada, but the distribution of these providers among provinces and urban and rural areas varies. Although surgeon endoscopists are more numerous, on average, they perform fewer procedures annually than internists.     

Canadian Consensus Conference on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in adults - update 2004.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is the most prevalent acid-related disorder in Canada and is associated with significant impairment of health-related quality of life. Since the last Canadian Consensus Conference in 1996, GERD management has evolved substantially. OBJECTIVE: To develop up-to-date evidence-based recommendations relevant to the needs of Canadian health care providers for the management of the esophageal manifestations of GERD. CONSENSUS PROCESS: A multidisciplinary group of 23 voting participants developed recommendation statements using a Delphi approach; after presentation of relevant data at the meeting, the quality of the evidence, strength of recommendation and level of consensus were graded by participants according to accepted principles. OUTCOMES: GERD applies to individuals who reflux gastric contents into the esophagus causing symptoms sufficient to reduce quality of life, injury or both; endoscopy-negative reflux disease applies to individuals who have GERD and a normal endoscopy. Uninvestigated heartburn-dominant dyspepsia - characterised by heartburn or acid regurgitation - includes erosive esophagitis or endoscopy-negative reflux disease, and may be treated empirically as GERD without further investigation provided there are no alarm features. Lifestyle modifications are ineffective for frequent or severe GERD symptoms; over-the-counter antacids or histamine H2-receptor antagonists are effective for some patients with mild or infrequent GERD symptoms. Proton pump inhibitors are more effective for healing and symptom relief than histamine H2-receptor antagonists; their efficacy is proportional to their ability to reduce intragastric acidity. Response to initial therapy - a once-daily proton pump inhibitor unless symptoms are mild and infrequent (fewer than three times per week) - should be assessed at four to eight weeks. Maintenance medical therapy should be at the lowest dose and frequency necessary to maintain symptom relief; antireflux surgery is an alternative for a small proportion of selected patients. Routine testing for Helicobacter pylori infection is unnecessary before starting GERD therapy. GERD is associated with Barrett's epithelium and esophageal adenocarcinoma but the risk of malignancy is very low. Endoscopic screening for Barrett's epithelium may be considered in adults with GERD symptoms for more than 10 years; Barrett's epithelium and low-grade dysplasia generally warrant surveillance; endoscopic or surgical management should be considered for confirmed high-grade dysplasia or malignancy. CONCLUSION: Prospective studies are needed to investigate clinically relevant risk factors for the development of GERD and its complications; GERD progression, on and off therapy; optimal management strategies for typical GERD symptoms in primary care patients; and optimal management strategies for atypical GERD symptoms, Barrett's epithelium and esophageal adenocarcinoma.     

Prevalence and risk factors for lymph node metastasis after noncurative endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Additional surgery for all patients with noncurative resection after endoscopic resection (ER) for early gastric cancer (EGC) may be excessive due to the relatively low rate of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in such patients. However, the prevalence and risk factors for LNM after noncurative ER have not been consistent across studies.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of electronic databases through August 10, 2018 to identify cohort studies with patients who underwent additional surgery after noncurative ER for EGC. The prevalence of LNM in such patients was extracted for all studies. Odds ratios (ORs) were combined using random-effects meta-analyses to assess the risk of LNM, when possible.

Results

We identified 24 studies comprising 3877 patients with 311 having LNM (pooled prevalence, 8.1%). The risk of LNM was significantly increased in lymphatic invasion (OR [95% confidence interval] = 4.22 [2.88–6.19]), lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (4.17 [2.90–5.99]), vascular invasion (2.38 [1.65–3.44]), positive vertical margin (2.16 [1.59–2.93]), submucosal invasion depth of ≥ 500 μm (2.14 [1.48–3.09]), and tumor size > 30 mm (1.77 [1.31–2.40]). In contrast, there was no significant association between undifferentiated-type or ulceration (scar) and LNM. When studies were restricted to those that evaluated the adjusted OR, the risk of vascular invasion for LNM did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions

Several pathological factors, most notably lymphatic invasion and LVI, were associated with LNM in patients with noncurative resection after ER for EGC. Lymphatic and vascular invasion should be assessed separately instead of LVI (PROSPERO CRD42018109996).