Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 21, 2013; 19(43): 7552-7560
Published online Nov 21, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i43.7552
Published online Nov 21, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i43.7552
Author | Design | Study | Timing of endoscopy | Endoscopic index | Def. of MH | No of pat. Achieving MH |
Vecchi (2001) | Mc, RCT | Mesalazine 4 g orally vs 2 + 2 g orally and enema | 6 wk | Rachmilewitz | Rachmilewitz < 4 | 58% vs 71% |
Malchow (2002) | Mc, db, RCT | Mesalazine 4 g enema vs 1 g foam | 4 wk | Rachmilewitz | Rachmilewitz < 2 | 38% vs 37% |
Mansfield (2002) | Mc, db, RCT | Balsalazide 6.75 g vs sulfasal. 3g | 8 wk | 4 point scale | Score of 0 = normal mucosa | 27% vs 25% |
Hanauer (2007) Ascend | Mc, db, RCT | Asacol 4.8 g vs 2.4 g | 6 wk | Descriptive, no score | Normal endoscopic finding | 25% vs 20% |
Kamm (2007) MMX | Mc, db, RCT | MMX mes. 4.8 g vs 2.4 g vs placebo | 8 wk | Mod. Sutherland index | Mod Sutherland index < 1 | 77% vs 69% vs 46% |
Kruis (2009) | Mc, db, RCT | Mesalazine 3 g vs 1g x 3 | 8 wk | Rachmilewitz | Rachmilewitz < 4 | 71% vs 70% |
- Citation: Rogler G, Vavricka S, Schoepfer A, Lakatos PL. Mucosal healing and deep remission: What does it mean? World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19(43): 7552-7560
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v19/i43/7552.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i43.7552