Paper Details

  1. Home
  2. Paper Details

Cimetidine and acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a double-blind controlled trial.

Author: ByrnesD J, FrommerD J, HennessyW B, KennedyM C, MeredithC G, SweetenM V, WadeD N

Clinical TrialA clinical trial is a planned study conducted on humans to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and treatment methods. It aims to explore the possibilities of new treatments and improve the health of patients.
Journal ArticleAn article published in an academic or professional journal that reports original research or scholarly analysis.
Randomized Controlled TrialA clinical trial that randomly assigns participants to treatment and control groups to evaluate the effects of an intervention.

Overview

This study of 88 patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding found that cimetidine did not improve the severity of bleeding or the risk of rebleeding. In fact, more patients in the cimetidine group required surgery for life-threatening bleeding and had rebleeding.
Paper Details　
Original Abstract of the Article :
Patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding from a variety of lesions were admitted to a prospective double-blind controlled trial to determine if cimetidine reduces the severity of bleeding and/or the incidence of rebleeding. During the first 48 hours, the patients received intra...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元：
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-5994.1980.tb04241.x

データ提供：米国国立医学図書館（NLM）

Cimetidine and Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Double-Blind Controlled Trial

The world of gastroenterology is a complex and ever-changing desert, where the treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding requires careful consideration of various therapeutic options. This research investigates the potential benefits of cimetidine in reducing the severity and incidence of rebleeding in patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The study employs a double-blind controlled trial to compare the effects of cimetidine to placebo.

Navigating the Shifting Sands of Treatment

The study found no statistically significant advantage of using cimetidine over placebo in the treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. This finding challenges the previously held belief that cimetidine might be beneficial in this setting, prompting further research to better understand the role of this drug in managing this complex condition.

A Reminder of the Importance of Evidence-Based Medicine

This research serves as a reminder of the importance of conducting rigorous clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of medical interventions. The lack of benefit demonstrated for cimetidine in this study underscores the need for evidence-based decision-making in the management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Dr.Camel's Conclusion

This research reminds us that the desert of medical knowledge is vast and requires careful exploration. The lack of demonstrated benefit for cimetidine in this study serves as a reminder that our understanding of the complex interplay between drugs and disease is constantly evolving. By diligently conducting rigorous clinical trials, we can navigate the shifting sands of medical practice with greater certainty and ensure that our treatment strategies are grounded in solid evidence.

Date :
  1. Date Completed 1981-05-26
  2. Date Revised 2019-08-25
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

6971092

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

10.1111/j.1445-5994.1980.tb04241.x

Related Literature

Article Analysis
・Effective treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding
SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

English

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.