Table 3.
Omeprazole vs. Esomeprazole | Pantoprazole vs. Esomeprazole | Lansoprazole vs. Esomeprazole | Rabeprazole vs. Esomeprazole | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Participant (n) | 699 | 699 | 1,006 | 1,006 | 862 | 862 | 657 | 657 |
KR case (n) | 90 | 60 | 114 | 85 | 84 | 71 | 72 | 58 |
Mean follow-up (year) | 3.58 | 3.39 | 3.45 | 3.49 | 3.44 | 3.55 | 3.98 | 3.98 |
Rate (/1000 person-years) | 37.1 | 23.7 | 32.8 | 24.2 | 28.3 | 23.2 | 27.6 | 22.2 |
HR, (95% CI) # * | 1.57 | 1.00 | 1.37 | 1.00 | 1.20 | 1.00 | 1.24 | 1.00 |
(1.13, 2.17) | (reference) | (1.03, 1.81) | (reference) | (0.88, 1.65) | (reference) | (0.88, 1.75) | (reference) |
n, number; KR, knee replacement; HR, Hazard Ratio; CI, confidence interval; PS, propensity score; PPI, proton pump inhibitor; H2RA, Histamine-2 receptor antagonist.
Results from propensity score matched cohort study (i.e., intent-to-treat approach).
Adjusting for competing risk of death.