|
The Cochrane Collaboration
Cochrane Reviews |
| Explore | New + Updated | Other languages |
|
 |
Initial management strategies for dyspepsiaDelaney B, Ford AC, Forman D, Moayyedi P, Qume M
Bookmark this:
     more ...
SummaryEndoscopy testing may not be worth the extra cost and discomfort for many people with indigestion where drugs relieve symptoms adequately.Dyspepsia (indigestion) is pain in the stomach. It is sometimes caused by stomach ulcers. People might be tested for an ulcer by endoscopy (viewing the stomach through a tube down the throat), barium meal (swallowing a thick substance that can show up the stomach lining on x-ray) or testing for the bacterium that causes stomach ulcers (H. pylori). The review found no evidence to support endoscopy in all patients with dyspepsia. Proton pump inhibitor drugs were more effective treatments for dyspepsia than H2-receptor antagonists and antacids.
This is a Cochrane review abstract and plain language summary, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration, currently published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009 Issue 2, Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.. The full text of the review is available in The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1464-780X).
This version first published online:
April 24. 2000 AbstractBackgroundThis review considers management strategies (combinations of initial investigation and empirical treatments) for dyspeptic patients. Dyspepsia was defined to include both epigastric pain and heartburn. ObjectivesTo determine the effectiveness, acceptability, and cost effectiveness of the following initial management strategies for patients presenting with dyspepsia Search strategyTrials were located through electronic searches and extensive contact with trialists. Selection criteriaAll randomised controlled trials of dyspeptic patients presenting in primary care. Data collection and analysisData were collected on dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life and use of resources. An individual patient data meta-analysis of health economic data was conducted Main resultsTwenty-five papers reporting 27 comparisons were found. Trials comparing proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with antacids (three trials) and histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) (three trials), early endoscopy with initial acid suppression (five trials), H. pylori test and endoscope versus usual management (three trials), H. pylori test and treat versus endoscopy (six trials), and test and treat versus acid suppression alone in H. pylori positive patients (four trials), were pooled. PPIs were significantly more effective than both H2RAs and antacids. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were; for PPI compared with antacid 0.72 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.80), PPI compared with H2RA 0.63 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.85). Results for other drug comparisons were either absent or inconclusive. Initial endoscopy was associated with a small reduction in the risk of recurrent dyspeptic symptoms compared with H. pylori test and treat (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96), but was not cost effective (mean additional cost of endoscopy US$401 (95% CI $328 to 474). Test and treat may be more effective than acid suppression alone (RR 0.59 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83). Authors' conclusionsProton pump inhibitor drugs (PPIs) are effective in the treatment of dyspepsia in these trials which may not adequately exclude patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). The relative efficacy of histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) and PPIs is uncertain. Early investigation by endoscopy or H. pylori testing may benefit some patients with dyspepsia but is not cost effective as part of an overall management strategy. |