Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1994 Jul;29(7):618-23.
doi: 10.3109/00365529409092482.

Cisapride or cimetidine in the treatment of functional dyspepsia. Results of a double-blind, randomized, Swiss multicentre study

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Cisapride or cimetidine in the treatment of functional dyspepsia. Results of a double-blind, randomized, Swiss multicentre study

F Halter et al. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1994 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Functional dyspepsia is a major diagnostic and therapeutic challenge for the clinician. Several systems for the identification of 'high-risk' patients and classifications of dyspepsia subtypes and treatment schemes have been proposed in the past with limited experimental evidence to support the claims made. The present trial was designed to compare two different treatment modalities in a group of functional dyspepsia patients selected on the basis of a standardized diagnostic procedure as 'non-risk' for organic disease and to assess the result in the major symptom sub-groups of functional dyspepsia as a means of identifying the potential for improving treatment outcome.

Methods: The efficacy of the prokinetic drug cisapride (5 mg four times daily) and of the histamine H2-receptor antagonist cimetidine (200 mg four times daily) were evaluated after 1 month of treatment and after a further follow-up of 1 month. Patients were randomized to the trial if they fulfilled the following criteria: 1) 'low-risk' symptoms or negative endoscopy findings, and 2) 2 weeks of single-blind antacid treatment did not provide satisfactory relief. For analysis patients were stratified into dyspepsia subtypes.

Results: One hundred and sixty-one patients entered the run-in period, and 137 patients were randomized to the study. At the end of 4 weeks' treatment a small but significant difference in favour of cisapride was found; this difference can mainly be accounted for by the significant difference found in the dysmotility-like subtype (83% improved with cisapride versus 59% with cimetidine). No significant differences could be detected between drugs in the other dyspepsia subtypes at the end of the treatment-or follow-up period.

Conclusions: The study confirms the classification into dyspepsia-subtypes as a useful tool in selecting the most appropriate drug therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources