Background: It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment. Results: After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. −0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (−55.20% vs. −7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events. Conclusion The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin’s preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.

Background/Aims: Efficacy of proton pump inhibitors is limited in patients with nonerosive reflux disease (NERD). The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of esomeprazole with sodium bicarbonate and esomeprazole alone. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, noninferiority comparative study. A total of 379 patients with NERD were randomly allocated to receive either EsoduoⓇ/sup> (esomeprazole 20 mg with sodium bicarbonate 800 mg) or NexiumⓇ/sup> (esomeprazole 20 mg) once daily for 4 weeks from January 2019 to December 2019. The patients had a history of heartburn for at least 2 days in the week before randomization as well as in the last 3 months and no esophageal mucosal breaks on endoscopy. The primary endpoint was a complete cure of heartburn at week 4. The secondary and exploratory endpoints as well as the safety profiles were compared in the groups at weeks 2 and 4. Results: A total of 355 patients completed the study (180 in the EsoduoⓇ/sup> group and 175 in the NexiumⓇ/sup> group). The proportions of patients without heartburn in the entire 4th week of treatment were not different between the two groups (33.33% in the EsoduoⓇ/sup> group and 35% in the NexiumⓇ/sup> group, p=0.737). There were no significant differences in most of the secondary and exploratory endpoints as well as the safety profiles. Conclusions EsoduoⓇ/sup> is as effective and safe as NexiumⓇ/sup> for managing typical symptoms in patients with NERD (ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT03928470).

Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is one of the most common infectious diseases worldwide. Although its incidence is gradually decreasing, about half of the world's population still get infected. H. pylori infection is responsible for substantial gastrointestinal morbidity worldwide. It is the most common cause of gastric and duodenal ulcers as well as gastric cancer. Since the revision of the H. pylori Clinical Practice Guidelines in 2013, the eradication rate of H. pylori has gradually decreased with the use of classical triple therapy, wherein amoxicillin, clarithromycin, and proton pump inhibitors are administered, for 7 days. According to a nationwide randomized controlled study conducted by the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research released in 2018, the intention-to-treat eradication rate was only 63.9%, which was due to increased antimicrobial resistance induced by the use of antibiotics, especially clarithromycin. The update of clinical practice guideline for treatment of H. pylori was developed based on evidence-based medicine by conducting a meta-analysis. The draft recommendations were finalized after expert consensus on three recommendations regarding the indication for treatment and eight recommendations on the treatment itself. These guidelines are designed to provide patients, nurses, medical school students, policymakers, and clinicians with clinical evidence to guide primary care and treatment of H. pylori infection. These may differ from current medical insurance standards and will be revised further, if necessary, based on research-based evidence.

Background/Aims: Standard triple therapy, including a proton pump inhibitor, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin, has been recommended as the first-line for Helicobacter pylori infection. However, the eradication rate of standard triple therapy has declined over the past years because of the increasing resistance to clarithromycin in Korea. We analyzed the eradication rates and the 10-year change in the eradication rates in Korea. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed were searched for studies published between January 2007 and June 2018. The pooled eradication rates and their 95% CIs were estimated using a random-effect logistic regression model. Results: Twenty-six randomized controlled studies on standard triple therapy conducted in Korea were selected. The intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol analyses showed pooled eradication rates of standard triple therapy of 71.6% (95% CI, 69.9~73.3%) and 79.6% (95% CI, 76.6~82.2%), respectively. The eradication rate decreased with time. The ITT analysis showed that the 14-day therapy (78.1% [95% CI, 75.2~80.7%]) had significantly higher eradication rates than the 7-day therapy (70.0% [95% CI, 68.5~71.4%]) (P<0.01). Conclusions These results suggest that the eradication rate of standard triple therapy, as the first-line therapy, has shown an unacceptable decrease. The eradication rate increased when the duration of therapy was increased to 14 days, but it was not satisfactory. Therefore, other treatment regimens or therapies based on susceptibility tests should be considered for the first-line therapy.

Background/Aims: The eradication rate of the first-line standard triple therapy (STT) for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection has decreased since 2000; therefore, other first-line therapies are required. This study was aimed at investigating the efficacy of bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (PBMT) for first-line H. pylori eradication compared to STT, sequential therapy (SQT), and concomitant therapy (CT). Materials and Methods: The Ovid-MEDLINE, Koreamed, EMBASE, KMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from January 2008 to July 2018. All identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PBMT and non-PBMT for first-line H. pylori eradication therapy were included in the final analysis. Results: A total of 3,653 patients from seven RCTs were enrolled. The pooled eradication rates of PBMT by intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses were 82.1% (95% CI, 68.2~90.8%) and 88.8% (95% CI, 77.1~94.9%), respectively. However, no statistically significant difference was observed in eradication rates of the 10- or 14-day PBMT as compared to 14-day STT, 10-day SQT, and 10-day CT in ITT and PP analyses. PBMT was significantly higher in adverse events than in the other eradication regimens (RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.11~2.44). Considerable heterogeneity in adverse events was observed among studies (χ2=88.7; P<0.001, I2=93%). Conclusions PBMT can be the first-line treatment for H. pylori eradication in Korea when other first-line options, including STT, SQT, or CT, are unavailable due to their high adverse event rates.

Background/Aims: As antibiotic resistance increases and new first-line therapies emerge, salvage therapies for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication failures are becoming more common and complicated. This study aimed to systematically review overall salvage regimens after previous failure of H. pylori eradication. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials evaluating salvage therapies after previous H. pylori eradication failure was performed. A meta-analysis was conducted when an adequate number of studies suitable for grouping was found. Results: Overall, 36 studies with 77 treatment arms were identified, and they were highly heterogeneous regarding previously failed regimens and salvage regimens under comparison. Bismuth quadruple therapy after failure of standard triple therapy showed a pooled intention-to-treat (ITT) eradication rate of 75.5% (95% CI, 71.6~79.1%), and the rates were significantly higher with 14-day therapy than 7-day therapy by 9% (95% CI, 2~15%). Levofloxacin triple therapy after failure of standard triple therapy demonstrated a pooled ITT eradication rate of 73.3% (95% CI, 68.4~77.3%). In direct comparison, the two regimens were not significantly different in eradication rates. No study evaluated salvage regimens after the failure of bismuth or non-bismuth quadruple therapy. Conclusions The current studies regarding salvage regimens are highly heterogeneous. Bismuth quadruple therapy and levofloxacin triple therapy may be a reliable option after failure of standard triple therapy, but the regional profile of antibiotic resistance should be considered. Further studies are needed for salvage regimens after failure of non-bismuth or bismuth quadruple therapy.

Helicobacter pylori infection is one of the most common infectious diseases worldwide. H. pylori is responsible for substantial gastrointestinal morbidity with a high disease burden. Since the revision of the H. pylori Clinical Practice Guidelines in 2013 in Korea, the eradication rate of H. pylori has gradually decreased with the use of a clarithromycin based triple therapy. According to a nationwide randomized controlled study by the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research released in 2018, the intention-to-treat eradication rate was only 63.9%, which was mostly due to increased antimicrobial resistance to clarithromycin. The clinical practice guidelines for treatment of H. pylori were updated based on evidence-based medicine from a meta-analysis conducted on a target group receiving the latest level of eradication therapy. The draft recommendations developed based on the meta-analysis were finalized after expert consensus on three recommendations regarding the indication for treatment and eight recommendations on the treatment itself. These guidelines were designed to provide clinical evidence for the treatment of H. pylori to patients, nurses, medical school students, policymakers, and clinicians. These may differ from current medical insurance standards, and will be revised if more evidence emerges in the future.

Background/Aims: This study examined the long-term outcomes of undifferentiated-type early gastric cancer (UD EGC) with positive horizontal margins (HMs) after endoscopic resection (ER) and compared them between additional surgery and nonsurgical management. Methods: From 2005 to 2015, a total of 1,124 patients with UD EGC underwent ER at 18 tertiary hospitals in Korea. Of them, 92 patients with positive HMs as the only noncurative factor (n=25) or with both positive HMs and tumor size >2 cm (n=67) were included. These patients underwent additional surgery (n=40), underwent additional endoscopic treatment (n=6), or were followed up without further treatment (n=46). Results: No lymph node (LN) metastasis was found in patients who underwent additional surgery. During a median follow-up of 57.7 months (interquartile range, 27.6 to 68.8 months), no LN or distant metastases or gastric cancer-related deaths occurred in the overall cohort. At baseline, the residual cancer rate was 57.8% (26/45) after additional surgery or ER. The 5-year local recurrence rate was 33.6% among patients who were followed up without additional treatment. The 5-year overall survival rates were 95.0% and 87.8% after additional surgery and nonsurgical management (endoscopic treatment or close follow-up), respectively (log-rank p=0.224). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, nonsurgical management was not associated with an increased risk of mortality. Conclusions UD EGC with positive HMs after ER may have favorable long-term outcomes and a very low risk of LN metastasis. Nonsurgical management may be suggested as an alternative, particularly for patients with old age or chronic illness.

Background/Aims: This study examined the long-term outcomes of undifferentiated-type early gastric cancer (UD EGC) with positive horizontal margins (HMs) after endoscopic resection (ER) and compared them between additional surgery and nonsurgical management. Methods: From 2005 to 2015, a total of 1,124 patients with UD EGC underwent ER at 18 tertiary hospitals in Korea. Of them, 92 patients with positive HMs as the only noncurative factor (n=25) or with both positive HMs and tumor size >2 cm (n=67) were included. These patients underwent additional surgery (n=40), underwent additional endoscopic treatment (n=6), or were followed up without further treatment (n=46). Results: No lymph node (LN) metastasis was found in patients who underwent additional surgery. During a median follow-up of 57.7 months (interquartile range, 27.6 to 68.8 months), no LN or distant metastases or gastric cancer-related deaths occurred in the overall cohort. At baseline, the residual cancer rate was 57.8% (26/45) after additional surgery or ER. The 5-year local recurrence rate was 33.6% among patients who were followed up without additional treatment. The 5-year overall survival rates were 95.0% and 87.8% after additional surgery and nonsurgical management (endoscopic treatment or close follow-up), respectively (log-rank p=0.224). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, nonsurgical management was not associated with an increased risk of mortality. Conclusions UD EGC with positive HMs after ER may have favorable long-term outcomes and a very low risk of LN metastasis. Nonsurgical management may be suggested as an alternative, particularly for patients with old age or chronic illness.

Helicobacter pylori infection is one of the most common infectious diseases worldwide. Although the prevalence of H. pylori is gradually decreasing, approximately half of the world's population still becomes infected with this disease. H. pylori is responsible for substantial gastrointestinal morbidity worldwide, with a high disease burden. It is the most common cause of gastric and duodenal ulcers and gastric cancer. Since the revision of the H. pylori clinical practice guidelines in 2013 in Korea, the eradication rate of H. pylori has gradually decreased with the use of a clarithromycin-based triple therapy for 7 days. According to a nationwide randomized controlled study conducted by the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research released in 2018, the intention-to-treat eradication rate was only 63.9%, which was mostly due to increased antimicrobial resistance, especially from clarithromycin. The clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of H. pylori were updated according to evidence-based medicine from a meta-analysis conducted on a target group receiving the latest level of eradication therapy. The draft recommendations developed based on the meta-analysis were finalized after an expert consensus on three recommendations regarding the indication for treatment and eight recommendations for the treatment itself. These guidelines were designed to provide clinical evidence for the treatment (including primary care treatment) of H. pylori infection to patients, nurses, medical school students, policymakers, and clinicians. These may differ from current medical insurance standards and will be revised if more evidence emerges in the future.