Background::An evidence gap still exists regarding the efficacy and safety of tegoprazan in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) in China. This study aimed to verify the efficacy and safety of tegoprazan vs. esomeprazole in patients with EE in China. Methods::This study was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase III trial of patients with EE randomized 1:1 to tegoprazan 50 mg/day vs. esomeprazole 40 mg/day. This study was conducted in 32 sites between October 24, 2018 and October 18, 2019. The primary endpoint was the cumulative endoscopic healing rate at week 8. The secondary endpoint included endoscopic healing rate at week 4, changes in the reflux disease questionnaire (RDQ) and gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) scores, and symptom improvement. Results::A total of 261 patients were randomized: 132 to the tegoprazan group and 129 to the esomeprazole group. The cumulative endoscopic healing rate at 8 weeks in the tegoprazan group was non-inferior to that of the esomeprazole group (91.1% vs. 92.8%, difference: -1.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -8.5%, 5.0%, P = 0.008). There were no statistically significant differences in the changes in RDQ (total, severity, and frequency) and GERD-HRQL scores between the two groups (all P >0.05). The percentages of days without symptoms, including daytime and nighttime symptoms based on patients' diaries, were similar between the two groups (all P >0.05). In the tegoprazan and esomeprazole groups, 71.5% (93/130) and 61.7% (79/128) of the participants reported adverse events (AEs), 2.3% and 0 experienced serious AEs, while 70.0% and 60.2% had treatment-emergent AEs, respectively. Conclusion::Tegoprazan 50 mg/day demonstrated non-inferior efficacy in healing EE, symptom improvement, and quality of life, and it has similar tolerability compared with esomeprazole 40 mg/day.

Background::An evidence gap still exists regarding the efficacy and safety of tegoprazan in patients with erosive esophagitis (EE) in China. This study aimed to verify the efficacy and safety of tegoprazan vs. esomeprazole in patients with EE in China. Methods::This study was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase III trial of patients with EE randomized 1:1 to tegoprazan 50 mg/day vs. esomeprazole 40 mg/day. This study was conducted in 32 sites between October 24, 2018 and October 18, 2019. The primary endpoint was the cumulative endoscopic healing rate at week 8. The secondary endpoint included endoscopic healing rate at week 4, changes in the reflux disease questionnaire (RDQ) and gastroesophageal reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) scores, and symptom improvement. Results::A total of 261 patients were randomized: 132 to the tegoprazan group and 129 to the esomeprazole group. The cumulative endoscopic healing rate at 8 weeks in the tegoprazan group was non-inferior to that of the esomeprazole group (91.1% vs. 92.8%, difference: -1.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -8.5%, 5.0%, P = 0.008). There were no statistically significant differences in the changes in RDQ (total, severity, and frequency) and GERD-HRQL scores between the two groups (all P >0.05). The percentages of days without symptoms, including daytime and nighttime symptoms based on patients' diaries, were similar between the two groups (all P >0.05). In the tegoprazan and esomeprazole groups, 71.5% (93/130) and 61.7% (79/128) of the participants reported adverse events (AEs), 2.3% and 0 experienced serious AEs, while 70.0% and 60.2% had treatment-emergent AEs, respectively. Conclusion::Tegoprazan 50 mg/day demonstrated non-inferior efficacy in healing EE, symptom improvement, and quality of life, and it has similar tolerability compared with esomeprazole 40 mg/day.

OBJECTIVE To investigate and analyze the bacteria on the nurse mask in ICU ward and its air effects disinfection.METHODS Sixty masks were examined for the bacteria numbers,germiculture and drug resistance.The bacteria numbers on the mask were recorded in 2,4,6 and 8 h with or without air disinfection,and the numbers of air bacteria were also estimated before and after air disinfection 2,4,6 and 8 h.The kinds and drug resistance of bacteria in the sputum of patients were recorded during the examining time.RESULTS The meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus(MRS,90.6%) and the Escherichia coli(ECO,9.4%) were the major bacteria on the mask.The numbers of bacteria on the mask at 2,4,6 and 8 h with air disinfection were 1.2?1.5,3.4 ?2.8,4.2?3.4 and 5.3?3.6 CFU/cm2,respectively.The numbers of bacteria on the air before air disinfection were 1264?314 CFU/m3 and after air disinfection 2,4,6 and 8 h were 917?213,790?176,676?179 and 483?167 CFU/m3,respectively.The numbers of bacteria on the mask and on the ward air were decreased obviously after the air disinfection comparing without disinfection.MRS was found in 26.7% patients sputum,and had the same drug-resistance spectrum as the bacteria on the mask.CONCLUSIONS MRS and ECO may be infected through air,and the effective air disinfection could reduce the numbers of bacteria on the air,and decrease the possibility of intercross infection.