Evidence Hub

S934 Potassium-Competitive Acid Blockers Versus Proton Pump Inhibitors in Patients With Grade C and D Erosive Esophagitis: A Meta-Analysis

Eddie T. He, Sunil Sadruddin Samnani, Mohammad Yaghoobi, Yuhong Yuan, Richard H. Hunt

The American Journal of Gastroenterology, 2025

2,836 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Introduction: Severe erosive esophagitis, defined as Los Angeles Classification Grades C and D, remains a therapeutic challenge due to suboptimal healing rates despite treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs), which provide more potent and sustained acid suppression, may offer improved healing outcomes. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of PCABs versus PPIs in patients with Grade C or D erosive esophagitis. Methods: A comprehensive electronic search was conducted through February 2025 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PCABs and PPIs in this patient population. The primary outcome was endoscopic healing at 4 and 8 weeks. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model (RevMan 5.4.1) to account for heterogeneity. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. A subgroup analysis was performed comparing studies with equivalent doses of the same PCAB and PPI. Results: Six RCTs involving 2,836 patients (1,433 receiving PCABs and 1,403 receiving PPIs) were included from 1,208 citations. The studies evaluated vonoprazan, zastaprazan, and fexuprazan (PCABs), and lansoprazole and esomeprazole (PPIs). In the subgroup analysis of 4 studies comparing vonoprazan 20 mg with lansoprazole 30 mg, vonoprazan demonstrated significantly higher healing rates at both 4 and 8 weeks: RR 1.12 (95% CI 1.03-1.21; P = 0.005) at 4 weeks,…

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. Reported size: 2,836 participants or records.

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