Efficacy of ursodeoxycholic acid for bile reflux after distal gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer: a secondary analysis of the PEGASUS-D randomized clinical trial
Abstract
Background: Few studies have been conducted on the prevention of bile reflux in gastric cancer patients who have undergone gastrectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in preventing bile reflux after gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer. Methods: This study was a secondary analysis of the PEGASUS-D trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Adults with a diagnosis of gastric cancer who underwent gastrectomy were enrolled. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to receive 300 mg of UDCA, 600 mg of UDCA, or placebo at a ratio of 1:1:1. UDCA and placebo were administered daily for 52 weeks. The primary outcomes included bile reflux symptoms at each time point, the percentage of participants with bile reflux, and the grade of gastritis. Results: Among 521 participants who underwent randomization, 151, 164, and 150 participants were analyzed from the 300 mg UDCA, 600 mg UDCA, and placebo groups, respectively. The difference in symptoms between the three groups was not significant. Bile reflux was less evident in the UDCA group than in the placebo group; however, this difference was significant only in the 300 mg group at 12 months postoperation (odds ratio, 0.44; P=0.0076). A significant reduction in gastritis was also observed in the 300 mg group at 12 months postoperation (odds ratio, 0.50; P=0.0368) compared to the placebo group. Conclusions: This study showed that UDCA…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 521 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
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.