Copyright
©2009 The WJG Press and Baishideng.
World J Gastroenterol. Feb 28, 2009; 15(8): 990-995
Published online Feb 28, 2009. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.990
Published online Feb 28, 2009. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.990
Omeprazole (n = 68) | Lansoprazole (n = 69) | pantoprazole (n = 69) | Esomeprazole (n = 68) | Statistical difference | |
Sex (male/female) | 33/35 | 35/34 | 34/35 | 33/35 | NS |
Age (mean ± SD) (yr) | 57.9 ± 14.1 | 58.1 ± 13.0 | 57.8 ± 13.2 | 57.4 ± 12.8 | NS |
H pylori (positive/negative) Endoscopic esophagitis (Los Angeles classification) | 29/39 | 31/38 | 30/39 | 29/39 | NS |
A | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | NS |
B | 26 | 26 | 28 | 26 | NS |
C | 20 | 21 | 20 | 20 | NS |
D | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | NS |
Symptoms | |||||
Heartburn (%) | 61 (89.7) | 63 (91.3) | 62 (89.9) | 63 (92.6) | NS |
Acid reflux (%) | 33 (48.5) | 35 (50.7) | 34 (49.3) | 35 (51.5) | NS |
No symptom (%) | 8 (11.8) | 5 (7.2) | 8 (11.5) | 5 (7.4) | NS |
- Citation: Zheng RN. Comparative study of omeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole and esomeprazole for symptom relief in patients with reflux esophagitis. World J Gastroenterol 2009; 15(8): 990-995
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v15/i8/990.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.15.990