Skip to main content
. 2013 Jun 12;49(5):814–824. doi: 10.1007/s00535-013-0839-5

Table 4.

Relationship between aspirin-associated gastroduodenal injuries and antiulcer drug treatment

Total
n = 1454
AMB
n = 935 (64.3)
Erosion
n = 425 (29.2)
p valuea Ulcer
n = 94 (6.5)
p valueb
No antiulcer drug (%) 690 (47.5) 390 (41.7) 242 (56.9) <0.0001 58 (61.7) 0.0003
PPI alone (%) 243 (16.7) 193 (20.6) 43 (10.1) <0.0001 7 (7.4) 0.0014
H2RA alone (%) 263 (18.1) 192 (20.5) 58 (13.6) 0.0025 13 (13.8) 0.1367
CAD alone (%) 171 (11.8) 98 (10.5) 62 (14.6) 0.0364 11 (11.7) 0.7246
PGA alone (%) 2 (0.1) 1 (0.1) 1 (0.2) 0.5275 0 (0.0) 1.0000
PPI + H2RA (%) 2 (0.1) 1 (0.1) 1 (0.2) 0.5275 0 (0.0) 1.0000
PPI + CAD (%) 33 (2.3) 26 (2.8) 7 (1.6) 0.2558 0 (0.0) 0.1606
PPI + PGA (%) 1 (0.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1.0000 1 (1.1) 0.0914
CAD + PGA (%) 1 (0.1) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.2) 0.3125 0 (0.0) 1.0000
H2RA + CAD (%) 47 (3.2) 34 (3.6) 9 (2.1) 0.1803 4 (4.3) 0.7716
PPI + H2RA + CAD (%) 1 (0.1) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.2) 0.3125 0 (0.0) 1.0000

Association of gastroduodenal injuries with concomitant use of antiulcer drug was analyzed using data of 1454 participants. The proportions of participants who received each category of antiulcer treatment were examined in the three groups of gastroduodenal conditions. Those in each treatment category were evaluated between the erosion group or the ulcer group versus the AMB group with Fisher’s exact test

PPI proton pump inhibitor, H2RA histamine 2-receptor antagonist, CAD cytoprotective antiulcer drug, PGA prostaglandin analog

a p value between AMB and Erosion

b p value between AMB and Ulcer