Comparison between rioprostil* * Bay o 6893, Bayer, Leverkusen, GFR. and sucralfate in the treatment of erosive duodenitis

M. Guslandi, S. Passaretti, E. Masci, P. A. Testoni, P. Salvini

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Thirty outpatients of both sexes with endoscopic evidence of autonomous erosive duodenitis were randomly treated with either rioprostil* (a PGE1 derivative) 200 μg b.i.d or with sucralfate 1 g t.i.d for four weeks. Unhealed patients continued the ongoing treatment for a further 4-week period. Both drugs were found significantly effective in inducing relief of dyspeptic symptoms. At eight weeks complete disappearance of duodenal erosions was observed in 57.2% of patients on rioprostil and in 64.3% on sucralfate. No significant differences between the two drugs were found in either their clinical or endoscopic effectiveness. Neither diarrhoea nor other side-effects were reported with rioprostil, while nausea was experienced by two patients treated with sucralfate. Rioprostil proved to be a safe and effective therapeutic agent in gastroduodenal disorders where the use of cytoprotective drugs is required.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)167-171
Number of pages5
JournalClinical Trials Journal
Volume24
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1987

Fingerprint

Rioprostil
Duodenitis
Sucralfate
Alprostadil
Therapeutics
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Nausea
Substance-Related Disorders
Diarrhea
Outpatients

Keywords

  • cytoprotection
  • Erosive duodenitis
  • rioprostil
  • sucralfate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

Comparison between rioprostil* * Bay o 6893, Bayer, Leverkusen, GFR. and sucralfate in the treatment of erosive duodenitis. / Guslandi, M.; Passaretti, S.; Masci, E.; Testoni, P. A.; Salvini, P.

In: Clinical Trials Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2, 1987, p. 167-171.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3c11a15061364a06a98664075fcccde2,
title = "Comparison between rioprostil* * Bay o 6893, Bayer, Leverkusen, GFR. and sucralfate in the treatment of erosive duodenitis",
abstract = "Thirty outpatients of both sexes with endoscopic evidence of autonomous erosive duodenitis were randomly treated with either rioprostil* (a PGE1 derivative) 200 μg b.i.d or with sucralfate 1 g t.i.d for four weeks. Unhealed patients continued the ongoing treatment for a further 4-week period. Both drugs were found significantly effective in inducing relief of dyspeptic symptoms. At eight weeks complete disappearance of duodenal erosions was observed in 57.2{\%} of patients on rioprostil and in 64.3{\%} on sucralfate. No significant differences between the two drugs were found in either their clinical or endoscopic effectiveness. Neither diarrhoea nor other side-effects were reported with rioprostil, while nausea was experienced by two patients treated with sucralfate. Rioprostil proved to be a safe and effective therapeutic agent in gastroduodenal disorders where the use of cytoprotective drugs is required.",
keywords = "cytoprotection, Erosive duodenitis, rioprostil, sucralfate",
author = "M. Guslandi and S. Passaretti and E. Masci and Testoni, {P. A.} and P. Salvini",
year = "1987",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "167--171",
journal = "Clinical Trials Journal",
issn = "0009-9325",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison between rioprostil* * Bay o 6893, Bayer, Leverkusen, GFR. and sucralfate in the treatment of erosive duodenitis

AU - Guslandi, M.

AU - Passaretti, S.

AU - Masci, E.

AU - Testoni, P. A.

AU - Salvini, P.

PY - 1987

Y1 - 1987

N2 - Thirty outpatients of both sexes with endoscopic evidence of autonomous erosive duodenitis were randomly treated with either rioprostil* (a PGE1 derivative) 200 μg b.i.d or with sucralfate 1 g t.i.d for four weeks. Unhealed patients continued the ongoing treatment for a further 4-week period. Both drugs were found significantly effective in inducing relief of dyspeptic symptoms. At eight weeks complete disappearance of duodenal erosions was observed in 57.2% of patients on rioprostil and in 64.3% on sucralfate. No significant differences between the two drugs were found in either their clinical or endoscopic effectiveness. Neither diarrhoea nor other side-effects were reported with rioprostil, while nausea was experienced by two patients treated with sucralfate. Rioprostil proved to be a safe and effective therapeutic agent in gastroduodenal disorders where the use of cytoprotective drugs is required.

AB - Thirty outpatients of both sexes with endoscopic evidence of autonomous erosive duodenitis were randomly treated with either rioprostil* (a PGE1 derivative) 200 μg b.i.d or with sucralfate 1 g t.i.d for four weeks. Unhealed patients continued the ongoing treatment for a further 4-week period. Both drugs were found significantly effective in inducing relief of dyspeptic symptoms. At eight weeks complete disappearance of duodenal erosions was observed in 57.2% of patients on rioprostil and in 64.3% on sucralfate. No significant differences between the two drugs were found in either their clinical or endoscopic effectiveness. Neither diarrhoea nor other side-effects were reported with rioprostil, while nausea was experienced by two patients treated with sucralfate. Rioprostil proved to be a safe and effective therapeutic agent in gastroduodenal disorders where the use of cytoprotective drugs is required.

KW - cytoprotection

KW - Erosive duodenitis

KW - rioprostil

KW - sucralfate

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023181688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023181688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 167

EP - 171

JO - Clinical Trials Journal

JF - Clinical Trials Journal

SN - 0009-9325

IS - 2

ER -