Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Helicobacter pylori
positive (CADET-Hp) randomised controlled trial
Naoki Chiba a Division
of Gastroenterology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada L8N
3Z5, b Division of Gastroenterology, Dalhousie University,
Halifax, NS, Canada B3H 2Y9, c AstraZeneca Canada
Inc, 1004 Middlegate Road, Mississauga, ON, Canada L4Y 1M4 Correspondence to: N Chiba, Surrey GI Clinic/Research,
105-21 Surrey Street West, Guelph, ON, Canada N1H 3R3
chiban{at}on.aibn.com
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective:
To determine whether a "test for
Helicobacter pylori and treat" strategy improves symptoms
in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia in primary care.
Design:
Randomised placebo controlled trial.
Setting:
36 family practices in Canada.
Participants:
294 patients positive for H
pylori (13C- urea breath test) with symptoms of
dyspepsia of at least moderate severity in the preceding month.
Intervention:
Participants were randomised to twice
daily treatment for 7 days with omeprazole 20 mg, metronidazole 500 mg,
and clarithromycin 250 mg or omeprazole 20 mg, placebo metronidazole, and placebo clarithromycin. Patients were then managed by their family
physicians according to their usual care.
Main outcome measures:
Treatment success defined as
no symptoms or minimal symptoms of dyspepsia at the end of one year.
Societal healthcare costs collected prospectively for a secondary
evaluation of actual mean costs.
Results:
In the intention to treat population
(n=294), eradication treatment was significantly more effective than
placebo in achieving treatment success (50% v 36%;
P=0.02; absolute risk reduction=14%; number needed to treat=7,
95% confidence interval 4 to 63). Eradication treatment cured H
pylori infection in 80% of evaluable patients. Treatment success
at one year was greater in patients negative for H pylori
than in those positive for H pylori (54% v 39%;
P=0.02). Eradication treatment reduced mean annual cost by $C53
(
86 to 180) per patient.
Conclusions:
A "test for H pylori with
13C-urea breath test and eradicate" strategy shows
significant symptomatic benefit at 12 months in the management of
primary care patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia.
|
What is already known on this topic
Studies of H pylori eradication in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia have shown reduced need for endoscopy and thus significant cost savings compared with a strategy of prompt endoscopy The "test for H pylori and treat" strategy has been recommended for uninvestigated dyspepsia, but there have been no randomised controlled trials showing improvement in symptoms What this study adds
This supports the "test for H pylori and treat" strategy |
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Dyspepsia is a common condition that affects up to 40% of the general population and has adverse effects on quality of life.1 In Canada, 7% of visits to family practitioners are for dyspepsia.2 Most patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal symptoms in primary care are uninvestigated, and the cause of the symptoms is usually unknown. The differential diagnoses include functional dyspepsia, peptic ulcer disease, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, and (rarely) gastric cancer. Family practitioners are comfortable treating patients without an initial diagnosis, prescribing up to 2.5 courses of empirical drug treatment before referring the patient for investigations.2 In most (up to 60%) of these patients, results of investigations are normal and the diagnosis is functional dyspepsia.3 Whether treatment to eradicate Helicobacter pylori in functional (that is, investigated) dyspepsia is beneficial has been controversial; positive and negative trials have been reported. 4 5
A suggested strategy for managing uninvestigated dyspepsia is to screen
patients aged under 50 without alarm symptoms with a non-invasive test
for H pylori and to treat patients with positive results
with drugs to eradicate H pylori.6 As this
recommendation is not based on evidence from randomised controlled
trials, we undertook a study to determine whether a non-invasive
H pylori "test and treat" strategy in primary care for
adult patients of any age with uninvestigated dyspepsia would result in
improvement or cure of dyspepsia over one year.
| |
Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This was a double blind placebo controlled parallel group multicentre randomised trial, performed in 36 family practitioner centres across Canada between September 1997 and April 1999. Local ethics committees approved the study protocol, and each participant gave written informed consent.
Selection of patients
Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or over with
uninvestigated symptoms of dyspepsia for at least the previous three
months. We defined dyspepsia as a symptom complex of epigastric pain or
discomfort thought to originate in the upper gastrointestinal tract and
including any of the following additional symptoms: heartburn, acid
regurgitation, excessive burping or belching, increased abdominal
bloating, nausea, feeling of abnormal or slow digestion, or early
satiety.
7 8
Patients with only heartburn, regurgitation,
or both were considered to have a diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal
reflux disease and were excluded. We also excluded patients
investigated by upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, barium study, or both
less than six months before randomisation or on more than two separate
occasions within the preceding 10 years and patients given eradication
therapy for H pylori less than six months before randomisation.
We excluded patients who had previous gastric surgery, previously documented ulcer disease or endoscopic oesophagitis, irritable bowel syndrome, or clinically significant laboratory abnormalities. We did not permit a course of treatment within 30 days before randomisation or during the treatment period with a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, aspirin (>325 mg/day), antibiotic, H2 receptor antagonist, proton pump inhibitor, misoprostol, sucralfate, prokinetic agent, or bismuth compound. Women of childbearing potential had to have a negative pregnancy test at baseline and maintain effective contraception.
We performed the Helisal rapid blood test (Cortecs Diagnostics, Deeside, UK) at the pre-entry visit as an initial screening test to exclude patients negative for H pylori.9 Patients had to have both a positive Helisal test result and a positive 13C-urea breath test result before randomisation.10
Randomisation and interventions
A computer randomisation was generated in blocks of four
consecutive patients and given to each centre in sealed, sequentially
numbered envelopes. Active and placebo medications were identical in
appearance and were packaged into blister packages placed in a sealed
box by non-study personnel. The randomisation code was broken only at
the end of the study after the database was locked.
We allocated patients randomly to either omeprazole 20 mg, metronidazole 500 mg, and clarithromycin 250 mg ("eradication arm") or omeprazole 20 mg, placebo metronidazole, and placebo clarithromycin ("placebo arm") twice daily for seven days. The follow up period was 12 months, with assessments at monthly intervals. During these clinic and telephone visits, the study coordinator interviewed the patients. We did not include these scheduled visits in the economic analysis. We repeated the 13C-urea breath test at three months and 12 months after the end of treatment to determine H pylori status. Investigators remained blinded to results of breath tests throughout the study.
During follow up, patients were managed by their family practitioners according to their usual clinical practice. Recurrent dyspepsia during follow up did not result in discontinuation from the study. Endoscopy or barium radiography was not performed at the beginning of the study but could be done during follow up at the family practitioners' discretion. Family practitioners could prescribe H pylori eradication treatment and other treatments such as H2 antagonists or proton pump inhibitors as clinically indicated. Information about drugs consumed, tests performed, and all adverse events was recorded.
Adherence to drugs
Patients were considered adherent by pill count if 12 of the 14 doses were taken during the treatment phase. No patient was withdrawn
as a result of poor adherence.
Outcome measures
Global overall symptoms of dyspepsia
We assessed the global overall severity of dyspepsia symptoms over
the preceding four weeks by using the following seven point Likert-type
scale (GOS scale): (1) no problem; (2) minimal problem
can be easily
ignored without effort; (3) mild problem
can be ignored with effort;
(4) moderate problem
cannot be ignored but does not influence daily
activities; (5) moderately severe problem
cannot be ignored and
occasionally limits daily activities; (6) severe problem
cannot be
ignored and often limits concentration on daily activities; (7) very
severe problem
cannot be ignored, markedly limits daily activities,
and often requires rest. This seven point scale was amended from
previously validated five point and seven point
scales.
11 12
4/7) over the previous month.
For the primary outcome measure, we defined treatment success as a
score of either 1 (none) or 2 (minimal) on the symptom scale at the
final visit.13 As secondary outcome measures, we determined the proportion of patients becoming completely asymptomatic and treatment success according to H pylori status.
Other symptoms and subgroups of dyspepsia
At each visit, patients were asked to rate the severity of
specific symptoms of dyspepsia over the previous month with the same
seven point scale as for global overall symptoms. We carried out
retrospective analysis of treatment success for patients with reflux
predominant symptoms compared with those for whom the reflux symptoms
were not predominant (non-reflux predominant).
Quality of life questionnaire
We assessed quality of life by using the validated, self
administered quality of life in reflux and dyspepsia (QOLRAD) instrument.14 This disease specific instrument uses a
seven point Likert-type scale in which higher scores indicate better quality of life. Results are reported as average change in each of five dimensions.
Gastrointestinal symptom rating scale questionnaire
The gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS) questionnaire is
a well validated and self administered instrument. It includes 15 questions on different gastrointestinal symptoms, with a seven point
Likert-type scale in five dimensions.15 The severity of
symptoms reported increases with decreasing score.
Dyspepsia related health utilisation costs
Our objective was to compare the mean annual cost of H
pylori eradication treatment with that of placebo. Study personnel
measured dyspepsia related use of health resources prospectively at
monthly intervals by telephone and clinic interviews with a health
resource utilisation questionnaire. Direct costs included visits to the
physician (specialist, family physician) and other healthcare
professionals, drugs (prescription, over the counter), and
investigations (for example, laboratory tests, radiography, endoscopy).
Indirect costs of decreased productivity as a consequence of days lost
through dyspepsia took into consideration whether the patient was
employed, unemployed, or a senior citizen (aged over 65) and were
calculated from Canadian labour force and unpaid work
estimates.
16 17
We calculated the cost for each health resource from the frequency of resources consumed and their unit prices. We aggregated indirect and direct costs (Province of Ontario, Canada, Ministry of Health perspective) to determine the societal perspective. Because of the duration of the study, we did not discount costs.
Eradication of H pylori
We calculated the proportion of patients in whom H
pylori was eradicated on the basis of the result of the urea
breath test at 12 months or, in the case of a missing 12 month value,
the result at three months.
Determination of sample size
We based calculations on estimates of the difference in rates of
treatment success between treatments. The assumed treatment success
rate was 39% for the eradication arm and 20% for the placebo arm. In
order to achieve a two tailed significance level of 0.05 and a power of
90%, we needed 120 evaluable patients in each arm. To allow for a
maximum dropout rate of 25%, we needed 150 patients per arm.
Statistical evaluation
The intention to treat analysis included all randomised patients.
Patients who discontinued at any time were considered treatment
failures. We undertook a more clinically applicable analysis
"all
evaluable patients"
in those patients who had data on symptoms at
the 6-12 month assessments (figure). We carried data forward from six
months and beyond to replace missing 12 month data. We used the
Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test to compare proportions of success by
treatment group.
|
The main objective of the economic analysis was to measure and describe
the costs per patient over the year of the study. As costs were not
normally distributed, we used corrected
percentile bootstrap
methods to measure mean costs per patient.
18 19
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The disposition of patients enrolled and randomised into the study is shown in the figure. Of patients with positive Helisal test results, 152 (33%) had a negative 13C-urea breath test result. A total of 294 patients were randomised, and the two groups were well matched (table 1).
|
The proportion of patients who were considered a treatment success was significantly greater for the eradication arm than for the placebo arm, with comparable results in the intention to treat and all evaluable patients analyses (table 2). The number needed to treat to achieve one treatment success in the eradication arm was 7 (95% confidence interval 4 to 63). A significant benefit for the eradication arm was also seen when we used the most stringent endpoint of defining only completely asymptomatic patients as responders. The treatment responses in patients with reflux predominant dyspepsia and non-reflux predominant dyspepsia were of the same order of magnitude as for the overall groups (table 2).
|
The distribution of ulcer-like, dysmotility-like, and reflux-like dyspepsia subgroups was similar in both groups: 131 (90%), 76 (52%), and 122 (84%) in the eradication group (n=145) and 134 (90%), 93 (62%), and 129 (87%) in the placebo group (n=149). The subgroups showed considerable overlap, and only 29 (<10%) patients were in one category only. All dyspepsia subgroups showed a trend towards greater treatment success in the eradication arm than in the placebo arm (49% (64/131) v 36% (48/134) for ulcer-like dyspepsia, 39% (30/76) v 29% (27/93) for dysmotility-like dyspepsia, and 49% (60/122) v 36% (46/129) for reflux-like dyspepsia).
In multiple logistic regression analysis including age, sex, and treatment as predictors, only eradication treatment was significantly (P=0.009) associated with treatment success.
Results according to H pylori status
H pylori was eradicated in 75% (109/145) of the
patients in the eradication arm and in 14% (21/149) of those in the
placebo arm in the intention to treat population. During follow up, a
second course of H pylori eradication treatment resulted in
eradication in only 2 of 11 treated patients in the eradication arm
compared with 15 of 23 treated patients in the placebo arm. The
evaluable eradication rate in patients who received only the initial
course of study treatment was 80% (107/134) in the eradication arm and
4.4% (6/136) in the placebo arm. In secondary analysis, patients who
had H pylori eradicated had a treatment success rate of 54%
(69/127; 95% confidence interval 45% to 63%) compared with 39%
(54/137; 31% to 48%) in those who remained H pylori
positive. For individual symptoms, eradication of H pylori
also relieved epigastric pain or discomfort and belching symptoms but
not heartburn, regurgitation, bloating, nausea, early satiety, or
postprandial fullness (data not shown).
Quality of life assessments
Table 3 shows the impact of eradication treatment on disease
specific measures of quality of life. The difference in the change in
scores from pretreatment to study end showed significantly greater
improvement in three of the five domains for the eradication arm. The
gastrointestinal symptom rating scale assessment showed a significant
change at 12 months in the eradication arm for the constipation
dimension only (data not shown).
|
Health resource utilisation
Table 4 shows selected values for direct and indirect costs. The
mean total annual costs from the perspectives of society and the
Ontario Ministry of Health were lower for the eradication arm than the
placebo arm, although the differences were not significant (table 5).
Few patients had endoscopy or upper gastrointestinal barium examination
in the follow up year (table 6). The increased costs for patients
randomised to placebo were primarily incurred through increased visits
to the physician and drugs for dyspepsia (table 6). The proportion of
patients needing additional prescriptions was 50% (73/145) in the
eradication arm and 58% (87/149) in the placebo arm. The total number
of prescriptions for dyspepsia was also higher in the placebo arm than
in the eradication arm (75 v 67 for proton pump inhibitors,
117 v 56 for H2 antagonists, 19 v 12 for prokinetic
agents).
|
|
|
Adverse events
The population consisted of all 294 randomised patients. Sixty one
(42%) patients in the eradication arm and 62 (42%) patients in the
placebo arm reported at least one adverse event. Diarrhoea, headache,
increased abdominal pain, nausea, flatulence, and taste perversion were
the most common events reported. One patient in the eradication arm
stopped treatment owing to a skin rash. In the placebo arm, two
patients stopped their pills because of adverse events: one had crampy
abdominal pain and loose bowel movements, and the other had epigastric
pain. Minor elevations of liver enzymes (aspartate aminotransferase,
alanine aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase) occurred more often
in the eradication group than in the placebo group, and all resolved
within two to four weeks after the end of treatment.
Two deaths occurred during the study, both in the eradication arm. The first patient was diagnosed with metastatic brain cancer (primary tumour unknown) 10 months into the follow up phase and died before the 12 month visit. The second patient was a 69 year old man who was admitted to hospital with worsening dysphagia three months into follow up. He had no alarm symptoms at entry to the study. Investigations revealed inoperable oesophageal cancer, and the patient died one month later.
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
H pylori is known to cause duodenal ulcers and gastric ulcers and is linked to gastric cancer20 and MALToma (mucosal associated lymphoid tumour),21 but its association with dyspepsia remains unclear. Most studies of H pylori and dyspepsia have been done in patients with functional (that is, investigated) dyspepsia. Meta-analyses of these trials have shown either no benefit from eradication of H pylori 5 or at best a small benefit with a number needed to treat of 15.4
Patients do not present to the family physician with an identified cause for their dyspepsia, as they are uninvestigated at first presentation. They may have functional dyspepsia or diseases such as peptic ulcer or gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Unfortunately, symptoms do not reliably predict endoscopic findings or allow reliable diagnosis.3 The Rome definition of dyspepsia considers the symptoms of heartburn and acid regurgitation to be synonymous with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and not part of the symptom complex of dyspepsia,22 but it is well known that most patients have multiple, overlapping symptoms, 1 23 as we confirmed in this study. Even among patients with proved peptic ulcers, 28% can have heartburn or acid reflux as the predominant presenting symptom.24 Therefore, a definition of dyspepsia that excludes reflux symptoms does not fit the conceptual framework of family physicians, and we believe that these symptoms form part of the symptom complex of dyspepsia. 2 8
Effect of H pylori eradication on symptoms of
dyspepsia
Our study showed consistent results in favour of eradication of
H pylori for most outcome measures, including global
improvement (to mild or no symptoms) and complete resolution of
dyspepsia, improvement in several specific symptoms (epigastric pain or
discomfort, belching), and improvement in some aspects of quality of
life. The number needed to treat to achieve one treatment success was 7 (4 to 63). The 14% clinical gain observed in this study may be
attributable to the expected proportion of 5-15% of H
pylori positive patients with a true ulcer
diathesis.25 This is speculative, as we did not perform
endoscopy at the beginning of the study. Patients in whom H
pylori was eradicated had better relief of symptoms than those in
whom infection persisted, which is consistent with the hypothesis that
H pylori is responsible for dyspepsia in some patients.
Although extensive overlap of symptoms makes it impossible to completely exclude patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, we excluded patients with reflux disease previously diagnosed by endoscopy or 24 hour oesophageal pH study and patients with symptoms of only heartburn or acid regurgitation without epigastric pain or discomfort. Studies in patients with reflux disease who test positive for H pylori show that eradication of H pylori either does not affect the subsequent clinical course of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease26 or may worsen it. Inclusion of such patients in our study would have biased the results towards no effect. In this study, we saw a trend towards improvement and not worsening of dyspepsia in patients with predominant reflux symptoms (not statistically powered for these comparisons). These results are in keeping with a study in patients with peptic ulcers and concomitant reflux oesophagitis, in which symptoms improved after eradication of H pylori.24 Our data thus suggest that a proportion of patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia with predominant reflux symptoms and epigastric pain or discomfort benefit from treatment to eradicate H pylori, and our results are robust and generalisable to primary care.
Diagnosis and eradication of H pylori
Thirty three per cent of patients who were positive for H
pylori by whole blood screening had a negative 13C-
urea breath test. Thus whole blood testing is unreliable for use in a
"test and treat" strategy, and we recommend the more accurate
13C-urea breath test as the diagnostic method of
choice.27
The 80% H pylori eradication rate in this study is consistent with eradication rates achieved with omeprazole-metronidazole-clarithromycin in the community.28 The treatment was well tolerated, and adherence was high. The frequency of adverse events was similar in both arms of the study, and most were minor. In this study, one patient (age 69) was diagnosed with oesophageal cancer three months after inclusion. At the time of randomisation, alarm symptoms (particularly dysphagia) were absent. We believe it is unlikely that earlier endoscopy could have prevented this patient's death.
Treatment guidelines
Most dyspepsia guidelines recommend investigations in patients
over 50.
6 8 29
We agree that endoscopy should be
considered in patients at an earlier age in areas with high prevalence
of gastric cancer.30 However, in Canada, gastric cancer
has steadily declined over the past 40 years. Our study and the
recently reported Canadian adult dyspepsia empiric treatment
prompt endoscopy (CADET-PE) study were not restricted in age. No cases of
gastric cancer occurred in 1040 patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia
in the prompt endoscopy study.31 Although these findings are suggestive, adequately powered studies are needed to determine whether an age limit of over 50 is safe in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia.
Economic analysis
The cost analysis shows benefits in favour of eradication of
H pylori, although the differences were not statistically
significant. The study was not powered to detect economic differences.
The cost data do, however, provide another justification to advocate
the "test for H pylori and treat" strategy. As the time
horizon for this study was only one year, economic benefits would be
expected to increase over time for patients cured of their dyspepsia.
Nevertheless, it is important to keep in mind that at least half of
patients will need further prescriptions for dyspepsia after
anti-H pylori treatment. We have done further economic
modelling and analyses, which support the view that treatment to
eradicate H pylori is cost effective.32
Conclusion
This primary care study has shown that the "test with
13C-urea breath test and treat to eradicate H
pylori" strategy in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia
provides long term relief from symptoms and may reduce healthcare costs.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank Joanna Lee, AstraZeneca Canada, for statistical work. We also acknowledge the assistance of the other members of the CADET Summary Group: Alan Thomson, Alan Barkun, and David Armstrong. The CADET-Hp Study Group of principal investigators are G Achyuthan, Regina; D Barr, London; K Bayly, Saskatoon; W Booth, Antigonish; M Cameron, Regina; S Cameron, Halifax; H S Conter, Halifax; S J Coyle, Winnipeg; B N Craig, Saint John; R K Dunkerley, London; J Hii, Vancouver; W P House, Vancouver; E Howlett, Saskatoon; F F Jardine, Manuels; D Johnson, Winnipeg; K Kausky, Whistler; H Langley, Kingston; K R Loader, Brandon; P V Mayer, Kingston; D M McCarty, Edmonton; S Moulavi, Montreal; M Murty, Orleans; W O'Mahony, Corunna; P O'Shea, St John's; G Pannozzo, Waterloo; J Price, Portage La Prairie; P Sackman, Calgary; C L Sanderson-Guy, Nepean; K Saunders, Winnipeg; D Shu, Coquitlam; RJ Smith, Mount Pearl; T Tobin, Guelph; G R Webb, Grand Bay; P Whitsitt, Oshawa; W Winzer, Orleans; and P Wozniak, Cambridge.
Contributors: NC, SJOVvanZ, and PS were responsible for conception and design of the study, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article and revising it critically for important intellectual content, and approval of the version to be published. RAF, SE, and EG were responsible for analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article and revising it critically for important intellectual content, and approval of the version to be published. NC and SJOVvanZ act as guarantors of this paper.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: The study was financially supported by AstraZeneca Canada Inc.
Competing interests: NC and SJOVvanZ have acted as consultants and have received research support and honorariums for giving talks on this subject by the sponsor, AstraZeneca Canada, who manufacture omeprazole. PS and RAF are former employees of AstraZeneca Canada, and SE and EG are current employees of AstraZeneca Canada (sponsors of the study).
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Tougas G, Chen Y, Hwang P, Liu MM, Eggleston A. Prevalence and impact of upper gastrointestinal symptoms in the Canadian population: findings from the DIGEST study. Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94: 2845-2854[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 2. | Chiba N, Bernard L, O'Brien BJ, Goeree R, Hunt RH. A Canadian physician survey of dyspepsia management. Can J Gastroenterol 1998; 12: 83-90[ISI][Medline]. |
| 3. | Talley NJ, Silverstein MD, Agreus L, Nyren O, Sonnenberg A, Holtmann G. AGA technical review: evaluation of dyspepsia. Gastroenterology 1998; 114: 582-595[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 4. |
Moayyedi P, Soo S, Deeks J, Forman D, Mason J, Innes M, et al.
Systematic review and economic evaluation of Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment for non-ulcer dyspepsia.
BMJ
2000;
321:
659-664 |
| 5. |
Laine L, Schoenfeld P, Fennerty MB.
Therapy for Helicobacter pylori in patients with nonulcer dyspepsia. A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.
Ann Intern Med
2001;
134:
361-369 |
| 6. | Hunt RH, Fallone CA, Thomson AB. Canadian Helicobacter pylori consensus conference update: infections in adults. Can J Gastroenterol 1999; 13: 213-217[ISI][Medline]. |
| 7. | Chiba N. Definitions of dyspepsia: time for a reappraisal. Eur J Surg 1998; 164(suppl 583): 14-23[CrossRef]. |
| 8. | Veldhuyzen van Zanten SJ, Flook N, Chiba N, Armstrong D, Barkun A, Bradette M, et al. An evidence-based approach to the management of uninvestigated dyspepsia in the era of Helicobacter pylori. CMAJ 2000; 162(suppl 12): S3-23. |
| 9. |
Moayyedi P, Carter AM, Catto A, Heppell RM, Grant PJ, Axon AT.
Validation of a rapid whole blood test for diagnosing Helicobacter pylori infection.
BMJ
1997;
314:
119 |
| 10. | Mock T, Yatscoff R, Foster R, Hyun JH, Chung IS, Shim CS, et al. Clinical validation of the Helikit: a 13C urea breath test used for the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection. Clin Biochem 1999; 32: 59-63[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 11. | Veldhuyzen van Zanten SJO, Tytgat KMAJ, Pollak PT, Goldie J, Goodacre RL, Riddell RH, et al. Can severity of symptoms be used as an outcome measure in trials of non-ulcer dyspepsia and Helicobacter pylori associated gastritis? J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46: 273-279[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 12. | Junghard O, Lauritsen K, Talley NJ, Wiklund IK. Validation of 7-graded diary cards for severity of dyspeptic symptoms in patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia. Eur J Surg 1998; 164(suppl 583): 106-111[CrossRef]. |
| 13. | Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clin Trials 1989; 10: 407-415[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 14. | Wiklund IK, Junghard O, Grace E, Talley NJ, Kamm M, Veldhuyzen van Zanten SJO, et al. Quality of life in reflux and dyspepsia patients. Psychometric documentation of a new disease-specific questionnaire (QOLRAD). Eur J Surg 1998; 164(suppl 583): 41-49[CrossRef]. |
| 15. |
Svedlund J, Sjodin I, Dotevall G.
GSRS a clinical rating scale for gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and peptic ulcer disease.
Dig Dis Sci
1988;
33:
129-134[CrossRef][ISI][Medline].
|
| 16. | Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Cost benefit analysis. In: Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. New York: Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford University Press, 1997:205-231. |
| 17. | Labour force and unpaid work of Canadians: selected labour force, demographic, cultural, educational and income characteristics by sex (based on the 1991 standard occupational classification) for Canadian provinces, territories and CMAs, 1996 census (20% sample data). Ottawa, Canada: Statistics Canada, 1996. |
| 18. |
Thompson SG, Barber JA.
How should cost data in pragmatic randomised trials be analysed?
BMJ
2000;
320:
1197-1200 |
| 19. | Vinod HD. Bootstrap methods: applications in econometrics. In: Maddala GS, Rao CR, Vinod HD, eds. Handbook of statistics 11: econometrics. Elsevier Science, Chapman and Hall, CRC, , 1993:629-661. |
| 20. | Huang JQ, Sridhar S, Chen Y, Hunt RH. Meta-analysis of the relationship between Helicobacter pylori seropositivity and gastric cancer. Gastroenterology 1998; 114: 1169-1179[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 21. | Bayerdörffer E, Neubauer A, Rudolph B, Thiede C, Lehn N, Eidt S, et al. Regression of primary gastric lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue type after cure of Helicobacter pylori infection [see comments]. Lancet 1995; 345: 1591-1594[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 22. |
Talley NJ, Stanghellini V, Heading RC, Koch KL, Malagelada JR, Tytgat GN.
Functional gastroduodenal disorders.
Gut
1999;
45(suppl 2):
II37-42 |
| 23. | Tytgat GN. GERD remains an intriguing enigma. Gastroenterology 2001; 120: 787[ISI][Medline]. |
| 24. | McColl KEL, Dickson A, El-Nujumi A, el-Omar E, Kelman A. Symptomatic benefit 1-3 years after H. pylori eradication in ulcer patients: impact of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 101-105[ISI][Medline]. |
| 25. | Laine L. Helicobacter pylori and complicated ulcer disease. Am J Med 1996; 100: 52-9S. |
| 26. | Moayyedi P, Bardhan C, Young L, Dixon MF, Brown L, Axon AT. Helicobacter pylori eradication does not exacerbate reflux symptoms in gastroesophageal reflux disease. Gastroenterology 2001; 121: 1120-1126[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 27. | Chiba N, Veldhuyzen van Zanten SJ. 13C-Urea breath tests are the noninvasive method of choice for Helicobacter pylori detection. Can J Gastroenterol 1999; 13: 681-683[ISI][Medline]. |
| 28. | Chiba N, Marshall CP. Omeprazole once or twice daily with clarithromycin and metronidazole for Helicobacter pylori. Can J Gastroenterol 2000; 14: 27-31[ISI][Medline]. |
| 29. |
Malfertheiner P, on behalf of the European Helicobacter Pylori Study Group (EHPSG).
Current European concepts in the management of Helicobacter pylori infection. The Mäastricht consensus report.
Gut
1997;
41:
8-13 |
| 30. | Lam SK, Talley NJ. Report of the 1997 Asia Pacific consensus conference on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1998; 13: 1-12[ISI][Medline]. |
| 31. |
Thomson ABR, Armstrong D, Barkun AN, Chiba N, Veldhuyzen van Zanten SJO, Daniels S, et al.
Is prompt endoscopy necessary in uninvestigated dyspeptics? Prevalence of upper gastrointestinal abnormalities the CADET-PE study.
Gastroenterology
2001;
120;(suppl 1):
A50-A51[ISI].
|
| 32. | Chiba N, Veldhuyzen van Zanten SJO, Grace EM, Sinclair P, Simons WR, Lee JSM. The cost-effectiveness of a test and treat approach in primary care patients. Gut 2000; 47(suppl 1): A113-A114. |
(Accepted 25 January 2002)
Read all Rapid Responses
Israeli students are refusing to perform intimate examinations on anaesthetised women without their informed consent.