Abstract
Background: Nowadays PPI present cornerstone in the medical therapy of bleeding peptic ulcer. Controlled pantoprazole data in peptic ulcer bleeding are few. Aim: To compare the effect of intravenous (iv) pantoprazole (PPI) with iv ranitidine (H2RA) for bleeding peptic ulcers after endoscopic therapy. Methods: After endoscopic haemostasis, 122 patients were randomized to PPI 80 mg + 8mg/h or H2RA 50 mg + 13mg/h, both for 72 h and to continue with oral equivalent dose of these medicaments. Patients underwent second-look endoscopy on day 3 or earlier, if clinically indicated. The primary endpoint measure was re-bleeding before discharge and <14 days of enrollment. Secondary endpoint measures included number of surgeries performed, volume of blood transfusion, mortality rate and hospital stay. All data were statistically analyzed and a value of 0.05 or less was considered to indicate statistical significance. Results: In the group who were treated with PPI, re-bleeding rate was evidenced in 5 patients (8.33%) and in the groups who were treated with H2RA, re-bleeding rate was found in 9 patients (14.5%) with RR 0.27 and CI 0.12-0.60 and P< 0.05. The volume of transfused blood was lower in the group treated with PPI compared to the group treated with H2RA (930 ml vs. 1540 ml and P< 0.05). In this study there was not statistically significant difference in the hospital stay 15.00 vs. 17.80% (9 vs. 11 patients and P> 0.05), the need for surgical intervention 5.00 vs. 6.45% (3 vs. 4 patients and P= 1.00 ) and the mortality rate 1.66 vs. 3.22% (1 vs. 2 patients and P> 0.05).Conclusion: A high-dose pantoprazole infusion is more effective than a ranitidine infusion for prevention of re-bleeding after endoscopic epinephrine injection in patients with peptic ulcers and active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessels (P<0.05). In all bleeding peptic ulcer patients is needed to make the eradication of H. pylori infection with the aim to prevent re-bleeding in long term.