ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Zastaprazan is a potent potassium-competitive acid blocker developed to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of zastaprazan compared with esomeprazole in patient with erosive esophagitis (EE). METHODS: A phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority clinical study was conducted with 300 subjects with confirmed EE. Subjects were randomized to receive zastaprazan 20 mg or esomeprazole 40 mg once daily up to 8 weeks. The primary end point was the cumulative proportion of subject with healed EE confirmed by endoscopy at week 8. The secondary end points included the healing rate at week 4, symptom response, and quality of life assessment. Safety profiles and serum gastrin levels were also assessed. RESULTS: In the full analysis set, the cumulative healing rate at week 8 were 97.92% (141/144) for zastaprazan and 94.93% (131/138) ( P = 0.178) for esomeprazole. The healing rate at week 4 in the zastaprazan group was higher than the esomeprazole group (95.14% [137/144] vs 87.68% [121/138]; P = 0.026). There was no significant difference between groups in healing rates (the per-protocol set) at week 8 and week 4, symptom responses, quality of life assessments, and safety profiles. In addition, serum gastrin levels increased during treatment in both groups, with a significant difference between the 2 groups ( P = 0.047), but both decreased after treatment. DISCUSSION: An 8-week therapy of zastaprazan 20 mg is noninferior to esomeprazole 40 mg in subjects with predominantly low-grade EE. The healing rate at week 4 appears to be higher for zastaprazan than esomeprazole.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a noninvasive surgery, but postoperative pain is a major problem. Studies have indicated that erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has an analgesic effect after LC. We aimed to compare the efficacy of different ESPB anesthetic concentrations in pain control in patients with LC. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients aged 20 to 75 years scheduled for LC with the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification I or II. ESPB was administered using 0.375% bupivacaine in group 1 and 0.25% in group 2. Both groups received general anesthesia. Postoperative tramadol consumption and pain scores were compared and intraoperative and postoperative fentanyl requirements in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were measured. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were included in this analysis. Tramadol consumption in the first 12 hours, second 12 hours, and total 24 hours was similar between groups (p>0.05). The differences between postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) scores at rest did not differ significantly. The postoperative NRS scores upon bodily movement were not statistically different between the two groups, except at 12 hours. The mean intraoperative and postoperative fentanyl requirements in the PACU were similar. The difference in the requirement for rescue analgesics was not statistically significant (p=0.788). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided ESPB performed with different bupivacaine concentrations was effective in both groups for LC analgesia, with similar opioid consumption. A lower concentration of local anesthetic can be helpful for the safety of regional anesthesia and is recommended for the analgesic effect of ESPB in LC.
ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives: The effect of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on intraocular pressure (IOP) is debatable. There have been no studies investigating the effects of PEEP on IOP during one-lung ventilation (OLV). We aimed to investigate the effects of PEEP on IOP in patients undergoing OLV for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATs). Materials and Methods: Fifty-two patients undergoing VATs were divided into a zero-PEEP (ZEEP) and a 6 cmH2O of PEEP (PEEP) groups. IOP, ocular perfusion pressure (OPP), and respiratory and hemodynamic parameters were measured before induction (T1), immediately following endotracheal intubation (T2), 30 min (T3) and 60 min (T4) after a position change to the lateral decubitus position (LDP) and OLV, and 10 min following two-lung ventilation near the end of the surgery (T5). Results: There was no significant difference in IOP and OPP between the two groups. The IOP of the dependent eye was significantly higher than that of the non-dependent eye during LDP in both groups. Peak inspiratory pressure was significantly higher in the PEEP group than in the ZEEP group at T3-T5. Dynamic compliance was significantly higher in the PEEP group than in the ZEEP group at T2-T5. The ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen was significantly higher in the PEEP group than in the ZEEP group at T4. Conclusions: Applying 6 cmH2O of PEEP did not increase IOP but enhanced dynamic compliance and oxygenation during OLV. These results suggest that 6 cmH2O of PEEP can be safely applied during OLV in LDP.