Helicobacter pylori test-and-eradicate versus prompt endoscopy for management of dyspeptic patients: a randomised trial

Citation
At. Lassen et al., Helicobacter pylori test-and-eradicate versus prompt endoscopy for management of dyspeptic patients: a randomised trial, LANCET, 356(9228), 2000, pp. 455-460
Citations number
30
Categorie Soggetti
General & Internal Medicine","Medical Research General Topics
Journal title
LANCET
ISSN journal
01406736 → ACNP
Volume
356
Issue
9228
Year of publication
2000
Pages
455 - 460
Database
ISI
SICI code
0140-6736(20000805)356:9228<455:HPTVPE>2.0.ZU;2-2
Abstract
Background Strategies based on screening for Helicobacter pylori to manage dyspeptic patients in primary care have been proposed, but the clinical con sequences are unclear. We did a randomised trial to assess the efficacy and safety of a test-and-eradicate strategy compared with prompt endoscopy in the management of patients with dyspepsia. Methods 500 patients presenting in primary care with dyspepsia (greater tha n or equal to 2 weeks of epigastric pain, no alarm symptoms) were assigned H pylori testing plus eradication therapy or endoscopy. Symptoms, quality o f life, patients' satisfaction, and use of resources were recorded during 1 year of follow-up. Findings 250 patients were assigned lest-and-eradicate, and 250 prompt endo scopy. The median age was 45 years and 28% were H pylori infected. 1 year f ollow-up was completed by 447 patients. We found no differences in symptoms between the two groups (median registered days without dyspeptic symptoms= 0.63 [IQR 0.27-0.81] in the test-and-eradicate group vs 0.67 [0.36-0.86] in the prompt endoscopy group; mean difference 0.04 [95% CI -0.01-0.10], p=0. 12). Nor did we find any difference in quality of life or numbers of sick-l eave days, Visits to general practitioners, or hospital admissions. In the test-and-eradicate group, 27 (12%) of the patients were dissatisfied with m anagement, compared with eight (4%) in the endoscopy group (p=0.013). After 1 year, the use of endoscopies in the test-and-eradicate group was 0.40 ti mes (95% CI 0.31-0.51) the use in the endoscopy group, the use of H pylori tests increased by a factor of 8.1 (5.7-13.1), the use of eradication treat ments increased by a factor of 1.5 (0.9-2.7), and the use of proton-pump in hibitors was 0.89 (0.59-1.33) times the use in the endoscopy group. 43 (91% [80-98%]) of 47 peptic-ulcer patients would have been identified by endosc opy or treated by eradication therapy. Interpretation A H pylori test-and-eradicate strategy is as efficient and s afe as prompt endoscopy for management of dyspeptic patients in primary car e, although fewer patients are satisfied with their treatment.