Endoscopy as final arbiter in controlled clinical trials in peptic disorders

Abstract

Endoscopy should not be the sole final arbiter in controlled clinical trials of peptic disorders. Data on the response of symptoms to treatment and the occurrence of side-effects may be not as 'hard' as endoscopically assessed 'healing' and 'relapse', but may be clinically more meaningful. Furthermore, in most recent trials, 'healing' and 'relapse' were poorly defined; important information on residual mucosal lesions after healing was often neglected.