AIM: To evaluate the preferred diagnosis and management practices of BE among Asian endoscopists.
METHODS: Endoscopists from across Asia were invited to participate in an online questionnaire comprising eleven questions regarding diagnosis, surveillance and management of BE.
RESULTS: Five hundred sixty-nine of 1016 (56.0%) respondents completed the survey, with most respondents from Japan (n = 310, 54.5%) and China (n = 129, 22.7%). Overall, the preferred endoscopic landmark of the esophagogastric junction was squamo-columnar junction (42.0%). Distal palisade vessels was preferred in Japan (59.0% vs 10.0%, P < 0.001) while outside Japan, squamo-columnar junction was preferred (59.5% vs 27.4%, P < 0.001). Only 16.3% of respondents used Prague C and M criteria all the time. It was never used by 46.1% of Japanese, whereas 84.2% outside Japan, endoscopists used it to varying extents (P < 0.001). Most Asian endoscopists (70.8%) would survey long-segment BE without dysplasia every two years. Adherence to Seattle protocol was poor with only 6.3% always performing it. 73.2% of Japanese never did it, compared to 19.3% outside Japan (P < 0.001). The most preferred (74.0%) treatment of non-dysplastic BE was proton pump inhibitor only when the patient was symptomatic or had esophagitis. For BE with low-grade dysplasia, 6-monthly surveillance was preferred in 61.9% within Japan vs 47.9% outside Japan (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Diagnosis and management of BE varied within Asia, with stark contrast between Japan and outside Japan. Most Asian endoscopists chose squamo-columnar junction to be the landmark for esophagogastric junction, which is incorrect. Most also did not consistently use Prague criteria, and Seattle protocol. Lack of standardization, education and research are possible reasons.
Methods: A single-centre, retrospective study evaluating posaconazole Cmin in LTx recipients receiving posaconazole suspension or MR tablets between January 2014 and December 2016.
Results: Forty-seven LTx patients received posaconazole suspension, and 78 received the MR tablet formulation; a total of 421 and 617 Cmin measurements were made, respectively. Posaconazole was concurrently administered with proton pump inhibitor in ≥ 90% of patients. The median (IQR) of initial posaconazole Cmin following 300 mg daily of posaconazole tablet was significantly higher than that of 800 mg daily of posaconazole suspension [1.65 (0.97-2.13) mg/L versus 0.81 (0.48-1.15) mg/L, P
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Caco-2 and LS174T cells lines treated with omeprazole and esomeprazole were used in this study to assess the bacterial attachment of H. pylori within certain incubation periods.
RESULTS: The presence of proton pump inhibitors increased the H. pylori adherence in a time-dependent manner in both Caco-2 and LS174T cell lines. The double inhibition of P-glycoprotein using proton pump inhibitor and P-glycoprotein inhibitor caused low P-glycoprotein expression in the cell lines, resulting in higher H. pylori adherence compared to the control cell lines.
CONCLUSION: Proton pump inhibitors may alter P-glycoprotein expression in the gastrointestinal tract, and subsequently H. pylori adherence on the cell lines, and may contribute to resistance to drug therapy.
METHODS: Healthy subjects of Chinese (n = 12), Malay (n = 12) and Indian (n = 10) ancestry, aged 21-37 years, were enrolled. They provided a baseline stool sample (Day 1) and were then given a course of omeprazole at therapeutic dose (20 mg daily) for seven days. Stool samples were collected again on Day 7 and 14 (one week after stopping omeprazole). Microbial DNA was extracted from the stool samples, followed by polymerase chain reaction, library construction, 16S rRNA sequencing using Illumina MiSeq, and statistical and bioinformatics analyses.
RESULTS: The findings showed an increase in species richness (p = 0.018) after omeprazole consumption on Day 7, which reverted to baseline on Day 14. There were significant increases in the relative abundance of Streptococcus vestibularis (p = 0.0001) and Veillonella dispar (p = 0.0001) on Day 7, which diminished on Day 14. Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, Sutterella stercoricanis and Bacteroides denticanum were characteristic of Chinese, Malays and Indians, respectively. Lactobacillaceae and Bacteroides xylanisolvens were the signature taxa of male and female subjects, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated alterations in the gut microbiome following omeprazole treatment. This may explain the underlying pathology of increased risk of Clostridium difficile infections associated with omeprazole therapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Physicians who managed H. pylori eradication in daily practice across 10 Southeast Asian countries were invited to participate in an online questionnaire, which included questions about the local availability of antimicrobial susceptibility tests (ASTs) and their preferred eradication regimens in real-world practice. An empiric regimen was considered inappropriate if it did not follow the local guidelines/consensus, particularly if it contained antibiotics with a high reported resistance rate or was recommended not to be empirically used worldwide.
RESULTS: There were 564 valid responses, including 314 (55.7%) from gastroenterologists (GIs) and 250 (44.3%) from non-GI physicians. ASTs were unavailable in 41.7%. In countries with low and intermediate clarithromycin resistance, the most common first-line regimen was PAC (proton pump inhibitor [PPI], amoxicillin, clarithromycin) (72.7% and 73.2%, respectively). Regarding second-line therapy, the most common regimen was bismuth-based quadruple therapy, PBMT (PPI, bismuth, metronidazole, tetracycline) (50.0% and 59.8%, respectively), if other regimens were used as first-line treatment. Concomitant therapy (PPI, amoxicillin, clarithromycin, metronidazole) (30.5% and 25.9%, respectively) and PAL (PPI, amoxicillin, levofloxacin) (22.7% and 27.7%, respectively) were favored if PBMT had been used as first-line treatment. In countries with high clarithromycin resistance, the most common first-line regimen was PBMT, but the utilization rate was only 57.7%. Alarmingly, PAC was prescribed in 27.8% of patients, ranking as the second most common regimen, and its prescription rate was higher in non-GI physicians than GI physicians (40.1% vs. 16.2%, p
METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01776424.
METHODOLOGY: Patients with GERD and a control group of healthy asymptomatic volunteers were recruited. All subjects underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and the acid-saline perfusion test. Symptomatic ERD and NERD patients were given rabeprazole 20 mg twice daily for 2 weeks and their response to treatment assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 105 subjects were recruited: ERD=37 (symptomatic=24, asymptomatic=13), NERD=34 and controls=34. During saline perfusion, only the NERD group recorded a significantly higher sensitivity score compared to controls (2.74±7.28 vs. 0) (p=0.035). During acid perfusion, symptomatic ERD (15.42±13.42) and NERD (16.71±15.04) had significantly higher scores versus controls and asymptomatic ERD patients (both p<0.001). The mean %∆ reflux symptom score following treatment was significantly higher in symptomatic ERD patients compared to NERD patients (89.08±21.67 vs. 58.53±32.54; p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with NERD were a generally hypersensitive group while asymptomatic ERD patients represent a hyposensitive group of patients which merits further study.
METHODS: H pylori-positive patients were randomly assigned to either a rabeparzole (Pariet) 20 mg b.i.d., amoxicillin (Ospamox) 1 g b.i.d. and clarithromycin (Klacid) 500 mg b.i.d. for 14 days or rabeprazole (Pariet) 20 mg q.i.d., amoxicillin (Ospamox) 1 g q.i.d. also for 14 days. Eradication was tested for by the C13 -UBT at least 4 weeks after the completion of therapy.
RESULTS: H pylori was eradicated in 86.2% of patients (81/94) (95% CI: 77.8-91.7) in the STT group compared with 92.8% (90/97) (95% CI: 85.9-96.5) in the HDDT group on ITT analysis. On PP analysis, H pylori was eradicated in 91.0% of patients (81/89) (95% CI: 83.3-95.4) in the STT group compared with 93.8% (90/96) (95% CI: 87.0-97.1) in the HDDT group. Side effects were few although many patients in the STT arm complained of bitter taste. The HDDT arm was well tolerated by patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The HDDT gave a high eradication rate comparable to the STT for 2 weeks and was a well-tolerated regimen for H pylori eradication.
Methods: Here, we investigated the impact of the CYP2C19 genotype polymorphism and the success of triple therapy (fluoroquinolones/metronidazole/clarithromycin) on antibiotic-resistant strains in eradicating H. pylori in human subjects with non-ulcer dyspepsia (NUD), in human subjects with peptic ulcer disease (PUD) and in asymptomatic human subjects (positive and negative for H. pylori infection).
Results: Based on the CYP2C19 genotypes, determined by Droplet Digital PCR (ddPCR) analysis, we found 11.2%, 62.5% and 26.3% corresponding to rapid metabolizers, intermediate metabolizers and poor metabolizers, respectively. However, we did not find any significant effect for homozygous ABCB1 or CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*3 alleles. We detected several participants heterozygous for both ABCB1 and CYP2C19*2, CYP2C19*3 and CYP2C19*17 loci. The participants heterozygous for both ABCB1 and CYP2C19*2 and *3 loci should be defined as intermediate and poor metabolizers according to the haplotype analysis in the NUD, PUD and asymptomatic subjects.
Conclusions: Consequently, fluoroquinolones/metronidazole/clarithromycin-based triple therapies can be used to eradicate H. pylori infection, if one does not know the CYP2C19 genotype of the patient.