Comparison between empirical prokinetics, Helicobacter test-and-treat and empirical endoscopy in primary-care patients presenting with dyspepsia: A one-year study

Systematic review with meta-analysis: prompt endoscopy as the initial management strategy for uninvestigated dyspepsia in Asia

BACKGROUND

Prompt endoscopy should be considered as an initial strategy for uninvestigated dyspepsia in the background of high prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection and malignancy. However, with changes of disease patterns and dyspepsia definition, the prevalence of organic lesions at endoscopy in dyspepsia patients and the predictive values of alarm features and age for in malignancy remain unclear in Asian population.

AIMS

To evaluate the appropriateness of prompt endoscopy as an initial dyspepsia management strategy, we investigated the organic lesion detection rates in Asian dyspepsia patients as well as the diagnostic accuracies of alarm features and age thresholds for malignancy.

METHODS

Literature was retrieved from MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL Plus. The prevalence rates of organic lesions and young cancer patients among dyspeptic patients and the sensitivities, specificities, likelihood ratios and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of alarm features and ages were estimated. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed and the area under the curve (AUC) calculated. Subgroup, sensitivity and meta-regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of the 18 included studies, 15 reported organic lesion detection rates, and six and five analysed the predictive values of alarm features and ages respectively. The overall malignancy detection rate was 1.3% (95% CI: 0.80-2.10). Among cancer patients, 17.8% (95% CI: 10.90-29.00) were younger than 45 years and 3.0% (95% CI: 2.50-3.50) were younger than 35 years. The diagnostic accuracy of alarm features for predicting malignancy was moderate (DOR: 4.87, 95% CI: 2.72-8.71; AUC = 0.74). The diagnostic accuracy at age >35 years (DOR: 9.41, 95% CI: 7.89-11.21; AUC = 0.82) was better than that at age >45 years (DOR: 3.50, 95% CI: 2.32-5.27; AUC = 0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

The malignancy detection rate and proportion of young cancer patients were high among Asian dyspepsia patients. Alarm features and age were of limited value for predicting malignancy, and prompt endoscopy should be considered as the initial strategy for dyspepsia in Asian populations. The optimal age threshold for endoscopy screening in Asia might be 35 years.

A one-year economic evaluation of six alternative strategies in the management of uninvestigated upper gastrointestinal symptoms in Canadian primary care

BACKGROUND

The cost-effectiveness of initial strategies in managing Canadian patients with uninvestigated upper gastrointestinalsymptoms remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of six management approaches to uninvestigated upper gastrointestinal symptoms in the Canadian setting.

METHODS

The present study analyzed data from four randomized trials assessing homogeneous and complementary populations of Canadian patients with uninvestigated upper gastrointestinal symptoms with comparable outcomes. Symptom-free months, qualityadjusted life-years (QALYs) and direct costs in Canadian dollars of two management approaches based on the Canadian Dyspepsia Working Group (CanDys) Clinical Management Tool, and four additional strategies (two empirical antisecretory agents, and two prompt endoscopy) were examined and compared. Prevalence data, probabilities, utilities and costs were included in a Markov model, while sensitivity analysis used Monte Carlo simulations. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were determined.

RESULTS

Empirical omeprazole cost $226 per QALY ($49 per symptom-free month) per patient. CanDys omeprazole and endoscopy approaches were more effective than empirical omeprazole, but more costly. Alternatives using H2-receptor antagonists were less effective than those using a proton pump inhibitor. No significant differences were found for most incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. As willingness to pay (WTP) thresholds rose from $226 to $24,000 per QALY, empirical antisecretory approaches were less likely to be the most costeffective choice, with CanDys omeprazole progressively becoming a more likely option. For WTP values ranging from $24,000 to $70,000 per QALY, the most clinically relevant range, CanDys omeprazole was the most cost-effective strategy (32% to 46% of the time), with prompt endoscopy-proton pump inhibitor favoured at higher WTP values.

CONCLUSIONS

Although no strategy was the indisputable cost effective option, CanDys omeprazole may be the strategy of choiceover a clinically relevant range of WTP assumptions in the initial management of Canadian patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia.<p>

Helicobacter Pylori "Test-and-Treat" Strategy for Management of Dyspepsia: A Comprehensive Review

OBJECTIVES:

Deciding on whether the Helicobacter pylori test-and-treat strategy is an appropriate diagnostic–therapeutic approach for patients with dyspepsia invites a series of questions. The aim present article addresses the test-and-treat strategy and attempts to provide practical conclusions for the clinician who diagnoses and treats patients with dyspepsia.

METHODS:

Bibliographical searches were performed in MEDLINE using the keywords Helicobacter pylori, test-and-treat, and dyspepsia. We focused mainly on data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, meta-analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and decision analyses.

RESULTS:

Several prospective studies and decision analyses support the use of the test-and-treat strategy, although we must be cautious when extrapolating the results from one geographical area to another. Many factors determine whether this strategy is appropriate in each particular area. The test-and-treat strategy will cure most cases of underlying peptic ulcer disease, prevent most potential cases of gastroduodenal disease, and yield symptomatic benefit in a minority of patients with functional dyspepsia. Future studies should be able to stratify dyspeptic patients according to their likelihood of improving after treatment of infection by H. pylori.

CONCLUSIONS:

The test-and-treat strategy will cure most cases of underlying peptic ulcer disease and prevent most potential cases of gastroduodenal disease. In addition, a minority of infected patients with functional dyspepsia will gain symptomatic benefit. Several prospective studies and decision analyses support the use of the test-and-treat strategy. The test-and-treat strategy is being reinforced by the accumulating data that support the increasingly accepted idea that “the only good H. pylori is a dead H. pylori”.

Current management strategies and emerging treatments for functional dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia refers to painful and nonpainful symptoms that are perceived to arise in the upper digestive tract but are not secondary to organic, systemic or metabolic diseases. The symptoms of this syndrome often overlap with those of GERD and IBS, making its management far from simple. If Helicobacter pylori infection is diagnosed in patients with functional dyspepsia, it should be treated. In patients with mild or intermittent symptoms, reassurance and lifestyle advice might be sufficient; in patients not responding to these measures, or in those with more severe symptoms, drug therapy should be considered. Both PPIs and prokinetics can be used in initial empirical pharmacotherapy based on symptom patterns--a PPI is more likely to be effective in the presence of retrosternal or epigastric burning or epigastric pain, whereas a prokinetic is more effective in dyspepsia with early satiation or postprandial fullness. Although combinations of PPIs and prokinetics might have additive symptomatic effects, single-drug therapy is initially preferable. Antidepressants or referral to a psychiatrist or psychotherapist can be considered in nonresponders and in those whose symptoms have a marked effect on daily functioning. Despite extensive research, functional dyspepsia treatment often remains unsatisfactory. Better characterization of dyspeptic subgroups and understanding of underlying mechanisms will enable treatment advances to be made in the future.

Rate and yield of repeat upper endoscopy in patients with dyspepsia

AIM: To determine the rate and yield of repeat esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for dyspepsia in clinical practice, whether second opinions drive its use, and whether it is performed at the expense of colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent repeat EGD for dyspepsia from 1996 to 2006 at the University of California, San Francisco endoscopy service.

RESULTS: Of 24 780 EGDs, 5460 (22%) were performed for dyspepsia in 4873 patients. Of these, 451 patients (9.3%) underwent repeat EGD for dyspepsia at a median 1.7 (interquartile range, 0.8-3.1) years after initial EGD. Significant findings possibly related to dyspepsia were more likely at initial (29%) vs repeat EGD (18%) [odds ratio (OR), 1.45; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-1.75, P < 0.0001], and at repeat EGD if the initial EGD had reported such findings (26%) than if it had not (14%) (OR, 1.32; 95% CI: 1.08-1.62, P = 0.0015). The same endoscopist performed the repeat and initial EGD in 77% of cases. Of patients aged 50 years or older, 286/311 (92%) underwent lower endoscopy.

CONCLUSION: Repeat EGD for dyspepsia occurred at a low but substantial rate, with lower yield than initial EGD. Optimizing endoscopy use remains a public health priority.

Helicobacter pylori infection

INTRODUCTION

The principal effect of Helicobacter pylori infection is lifelong chronic gastritis, affecting up to 20% of younger adults but 50% to 80% of adults born in resource-rich countries before 1950.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment in people with a confirmed duodenal ulcer, a confirmed gastric ulcer, confirmed gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), confirmed non-ulcer dyspepsia, uninvestigated dyspepsia, localised B cell lymphoma of the stomach, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related peptic ulcers? What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment for preventing NSAID-related peptic ulcers in people with or without previous ulcers or dyspepsia? What are the effects of H pylori eradication treatment on the risk of developing gastric cancer? Do H pylori eradication treatments differ in their effects? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 58 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: effects of H pylori eradication in different populations; relative effects of triple regimens, quadruple regimens, and sequential regimens.

Helicobacter pylori and non-malignant diseases

In recent years, the focus of Helicobacter pylori clinical research has been mainly on gastric malignancy. However, the role of H. pylori in non-malignant diseases, such as peptic ulcer, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and non-ulcer dyspepsia, as well as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug consumption, is still of great interest. A 1- to 2-week course of H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment for H. pylori-positive peptic ulcer disease and a positive CagA status is a predictor for successful eradication of H. pylori. Antral prostaglandin-E2-basal levels appear to be critical for the development of aspirin-induced gastric damage in subjects without H. pylori infection. In clinical practice, among patients treated with proton-pump inhibitors, H. pylori status has no effect on the speed or degree of GERD symptom relief. For the management of dyspepsia in primary care, antisecretory therapy confers a small insignificant benefit compared to strategies based on H. pylori testing while these latter strategies may be cost-effective. H. pylori eradication therapy has a small but statistically significant effect on H. pylori-positive non-ulcer dyspepsia. An economic model suggests that this modest benefit may still be cost-effective but more research is needed.