Healing of erosive esophagitis with sucralfate and cimetidine: Influence of pretreatment lower esophageal sphincter pressure and serum pepsinogen I levels

Abstract

Forty-eight patients with erosive reflux esophagitis were allocated to either sucralfate tablets, 4 g/day, or cimetidine, 1.6 g/day, for 8 weeks in a randomized, prospective, single-blind, cross-over therapeutic trial. Pretreatment lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure and serum pepsinogen I (PG-I) levels were investigated as possible predictors of healing with either drug. The trial was completed by 41 patients (21 in the sucralfate group and 20 in the cimetidine group); one patient in each group was removed because of side effects. Symptom improvement occurred to a similar extent in both groups. Endoscopic results after 8 weeks of treatment with sucralfate revealed complete healing of esophageal erosions in 48% (cimetidine, 55%) and improvement in an additional 19% (cimetidine, 20%). Neither of these differences was statistically significant. Some patients refractory to one drug had endoscopic healing of esophagitis when treated with the other drug after crossover. LES pressure did not influence outcome in patients treated with sucralfate, whereas significantly (p = 0.024) more patients refractory to cimetidine had an LES pressure <7 mm Hg than did those with a good response to the histamine-2 (H 2)-receptor blockade. Patients whose esophagitis healed or improved after sucralfate tended to have lower serum PG-I levels than those with treatment failure (104 ± 35 ng/mL vs 125 ± 45 ng/mL), whereas the opposite occurred in patients treated with cimetidine (132 ± 58 ng/mL in responders vs 78 ± 27 ng/mL in nonresponders, p = 0.048). The results confirm that sucralfate is a valuable alternative to H 2-receptor inhibitors for the treatment of reflux esophagitis. They also provide preliminary evidence that LES pressures and serum PG-I levels may have predictive value of the response to one or the other of these two drugs.