These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Double-blind, placebo-controlled endoscopic comparison of the mucosal protective effects of misoprostol versus cimetidine on tolmetin-induced mucosal injury to the stomach and duodenum. Author: Lanza FL, Aspinall RL, Swabb EA, Davis RE, Rack MF, Rubin A. Journal: Gastroenterology; 1988 Aug; 95(2):289-94. PubMed ID: 3134266. Abstract: Ninety normal volunteers were entered into a double-blind, placebo-controlled study to compare the efficacy of misoprostol (200 micrograms q.i.d.) vs. cimetidine (300 mg q.i.d.) in protecting the gastric and duodenal mucosa from tolmetin-induced (400 mg q.i.d.) injury. After 6 days of treatment, the degree of mucosal injury between treatments was compared by endoscopy, using a predetermined rating scale of 0 (normal mucosa) to 4+ (greater than 25 hemorrhages or erosions or an invasive ulcer). Utilizing a score of less than or equal to 2+ (2-10 hemorrhages or erosions) as a therapeutic success, the overall success rates were 8/30 (26.7%) for placebo, 19/30 (63.3%) for cimetidine, and 27/29 (93.1%) for misoprostol (p less than 0.001). Pairwise comparisons were also significant: misoprostol vs. placebo (p less than 0.001), misoprostol vs. cimetidine (p = 0.006), and cimetidine vs. placebo (p = 0.004). A separate analysis of the gastric scores alone revealed success rates identical to those in the overall evaluation; however, success rates in the duodenum for both misoprostol (29/29) and cimetidine (29/30) were extremely high and did not differ. It is concluded that misoprostol is highly effective and significantly better than cimetidine in protecting the gastric mucosa from tolmetin-induced injury; however, both agents were highly protective in the duodenum.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]