Intravenous pantoprazole versus ranitidine for prevention of rebleeding after endoscopic hemostasis of bleeding peptic ulcers.

Author(s): Hsu PI, Lo GH, Lo CC, Lin CK, Chan HH, Wu CJ, Shie CB, Tsai PM, Wu DC, Wang WM, Lai KH

Affiliation(s): Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, 386, Ta-Chung 1st Road, Kaohsiung 813, Taiwan, China.

Publication date & source: 2004-12-15, World J Gastroenterol., 10(24):3666-9.

Publication type: Clinical Trial; Randomized Controlled Trial

AIM: The role of intravenous pantoprazole in treatment of patients with high-risk bleeding peptic ulcers following endoscopic hemostasis remains uncertain. We therefore conducted the pilot prospective randomized study to assess whether intravenous pantoprazole could improve the efficacy of H(2)-antagonist as an adjunct treatment following endoscopic injection therapy for bleeding ulcers. METHODS: Patients with active bleeding ulcers or ulcers with major signs of recent bleeding were treated with distilled water injection. After hemostasis was achieved, they were randomly assigned to receive intravenous pantoprazole or ranitidine. RESULTS: One hundred and two patients were enrolled in this prospective trial. Bleeding recurred in 2 patients (4%) in the pantoprazole group (n = 52), as compared with 8 (16%) in the ranitidine group (n = 50). The rebleeding rate was significantly lower in the pantoprazole group (P = 0.04). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups with regard to the need for emergency surgery (0% vs 2%), transfusion requirements (4.9+/-5.9 vs 5.7+/-6.8 units), hospital days (5.9+/-3.2 vs 7.5+/-5.0 d) or mortality (2% vs 2%). CONCLUSION: Pantoprozole is superior to ranitidine as an adjunct treatment to endoscopic injection therapy in high-risk bleeding ulcers.