224
Views
40
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Prevention of NSAID-related upper gastrointestinal toxicity: a meta-analysis of traditional NSAIDs with gastroprotection and COX-2 inhibitors

, , , , &
Pages 47-71 | Published online: 28 Oct 2009

Figures & data

Table 1 Included studies of gastro-protection

Figure 1 Misoprostol vs placebo for the prevention of gastric ulcers – efficacy by dose.

Figure 1 Misoprostol vs placebo for the prevention of gastric ulcers – efficacy by dose.

Figure 2 Misoprostol vs placebo – drop-outs due to side-effects by dose.

Figure 2 Misoprostol vs placebo – drop-outs due to side-effects by dose.

Figure 3 H2RAs compared to placebo for the prevention of gastric ulcer. Analysis by dose in studies of 12 weeks or longer duration.

Figure 3 H2RAs compared to placebo for the prevention of gastric ulcer. Analysis by dose in studies of 12 weeks or longer duration.

Figure 4 H2RAs compared to placebo for the prevention of duodenal ulcer. Analysis by dose in studies of 12 weeks or longer duration.

Figure 4 H2RAs compared to placebo for the prevention of duodenal ulcer. Analysis by dose in studies of 12 weeks or longer duration.

Figure 5 Proton pump inhibitors compared to placebo for the prevention of gastric ulcer in studies of 8 weeks or longer duration.

Figure 5 Proton pump inhibitors compared to placebo for the prevention of gastric ulcer in studies of 8 weeks or longer duration.

Figure 6 Proton pump inhibitors compared to placebo for the prevention of duodenal ulcer in studies of 8 weeks or longer duration.

Figure 6 Proton pump inhibitors compared to placebo for the prevention of duodenal ulcer in studies of 8 weeks or longer duration.

Table 2 COX-2 included studies

Figure 7 COX-2 vs tNSAID for endoscopic ulcers with any COX-2 dose.

Figure 7 COX-2 vs tNSAID for endoscopic ulcers with any COX-2 dose.

Figure 8 Gastroduodenal ulcers analysed by individual COX-2 inhibitor compared to tNSAIDs.

Figure 8 Gastroduodenal ulcers analysed by individual COX-2 inhibitor compared to tNSAIDs.

Figure 9 POBs (perforation, obstruction or bleeding) with COX-2s vs tNSAIDs.

Figure 9 POBs (perforation, obstruction or bleeding) with COX-2s vs tNSAIDs.

Figure 10 PUBs (POBs [perforation, obstruction or bleeding] or symptomatic ulcer) with COX-2s vs tNSAIDs.

Figure 10 PUBs (POBs [perforation, obstruction or bleeding] or symptomatic ulcer) with COX-2s vs tNSAIDs.

Figure 11 Clinical ulcers (PUBs [perforation, obstruction, bleeding or the presence of a symptomatic ulcer]) with COX-2 + ASA vs tNSAID + ASA.

Note: This is a non-randomized comparison.
Figure 11 Clinical ulcers (PUBs [perforation, obstruction, bleeding or the presence of a symptomatic ulcer]) with COX-2 + ASA vs tNSAID + ASA.

Figure 12 Clinical ulcers (PUBs [perforation, obstruction, bleeding or the presence of a symptomatic ulcer]) with COX-2 + ASA vs COX-2 alone.

Note: This is a non-randomized comparison.
Figure 12 Clinical ulcers (PUBs [perforation, obstruction, bleeding or the presence of a symptomatic ulcer]) with COX-2 + ASA vs COX-2 alone.

Figure 13 Clinical ulcers (PUBs [perforation, obstruction, bleeding or the presence of a symptomatic ulcer]) with tNSAID + ASA vs tNSAID alone.

Note: This is a non-randomized comparison.
Figure 13 Clinical ulcers (PUBs [perforation, obstruction, bleeding or the presence of a symptomatic ulcer]) with tNSAID + ASA vs tNSAID alone.