4.5 Article

Time, change and peptic ulcer disease in Rotherham, UK

Journal

DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE
Volume 40, Issue 7, Pages 540-546

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2008.02.024

Keywords

duodenal ulcer; gastric ulcer; natural history

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and aim. We have documented the changing pattern of peptic ulcer disease in our centre in the last quarter of the 20th century and speculate on the reasons thereof. Patients and methods. The profile of peptic ulcer disease patients presenting newly to our centre (population 250,000) from 1977 to 2001 was examined. All patients were prospectively followed and detailed records kept. Results are presented in 5-year periods. Results. Seven thousand five hundred and ninety new peptic ulcer disease patients (5564 duodenal ulcer + 2026 gastric ulcer) were seen, peaking in 1982-1986 but declining thereafter, and with a falling male preponderance. Patients with gastric ulcer were older than those with duodenal ulcer; were older than duodenal ulcer, the mean age of both increased over time and the age gap from the general population widened. The numbers presenting with perforation changed little but haemorrhage increased, particularly amongst the elderly. Ulcers refractory to H2 receptor antagonists declined even before proton pump inhibitors were introduced. Elective surgery, already declining before H2 receptor antagonists, had virtually disappeared by 1992-1996. Discussion and conclusion. Peptic ulcer disease affects an older population, an increasing proportion of whom present with haemorrhage. Refractoriness to H2 receptor antagonists and the need for elective operation was declining even before the emergence of modern treatment. We suggest the changes observed result not only from modem therapy but also substantially from a changing natural history. (c) 2008 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available