Efficacy of ilaprazole in the treatment of duodenal ulcers: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of trials included in the meta-analysis

Ref.	Language	Publication type	Time	Patients (n)	Duration (wk)	Jadad score
Ho et al[17], 2009	English	Full text	2002-2004	202	4	5
Zhou et al[19], 2009	Chinese	Full text	2005-2006	510	4	5
Song et al[18], 2010	English	Abstract	Not reported	156	4	2
Wang et al[23], 2011	English	Full text	2004-2005	117	4	5
Wang et al[24], 2012	English	Full text	2005-2006	496	4	5

Table 2 Results of the randomized controlled trials with intention-to-treat analysis

Ref.	Regimen	4-wk healing rate	Rate of adverse effects
Ho et al[17], 2009	I 10 mg/d	78.6% (77/98)	23.5% (23/98)
	O 20 mg/d	78.8% (82/104)	22.1% (23/104)
Zhou et al[19],2009	I 10 mg/d	90.3% (307/340)	8.2% (28/340)
	O 20 mg/d	87.6% (149/170)	11.2% (19/170)
Song et al[18], 2010	I 10 mg/d	85.9% (67/78)	6.4% (5/78)
	E 40 mg/d	87.2% (68/78)	7.5% (6/78)
Wang et al[23], 2011	I 10 mg/d	93.1% (54/58)	6.9% (4/58)
	O 20 mg/d	89.8% (53/59)	13.6% (8/59)
Wang et al[24], 2012	I 10 mg/d	95.0% (307/331)	8.5% (28/331)
	O 20 mg/d	90.0% (149/165)	11.6% (19/165)

I: Ilaprazole; O: Omeprazole; E: Esomeprazole.

Table 3 Sensitivity analysis of the included trials

Analysis	n	RR (95%CI)	P value
High quality studies	4	1.02 (0.98–1.07)	0.25
English studies	4	1.02 (0.97–1.07)	0.54
Studies using omeprazole as control	4	1.02 (0.98–1.07)	0.25

RR: Relative risk.