Evidence Hub

Comparison of oral efficacy between PPIs and H2RAs in subjects for prevention and monitoring of peptic ulcerassociated recurrence rates from 1985 to 2021: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cao Kim Xoa, Trần Võ Ngọc Minh, Nguyen Diem Kieu

Journal of Science and Technology, 2024

Abstract

Currently, although there are many randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of proton pump inhibitors and H2-antihistamines in relation to peptic ulcer disease, meta-analytical studies on this topic are still limited and conclusions have not come to consensus. Therefore, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration tool is essential. From January 1st, 1985, to May 31st, 2022, the study was carried out on three databases: Pubmed, Cochrane, and Embase. Statistics are expressed as odds ratios, with confidence intervals of 95 %, and a random effects model is used. Results: Proton pump inhibitors increase the effectiveness of treatment more than H2-antihistamines. Specifically, on prevention subjects = 0.15 (95 % CI: 0.05-0.44), patients who are monitored for relapse rates without medication = 0.92 (95 % CI: 0.75-1.14), and with medication = 0.50 (95 % CI: 0.31-0.80). In conclusion, proton pump inhibitors are the first-line medicine for ulcer prevention and post-healing monitoring. ® 2022 Journal of Science and Technology - NTTU

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free