4.7 Article

Time trends in upper gastrointestinal diseases and Helicobacter pylori infection in a multiracial Asian population - a 20-year experience over three time periods

期刊

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
卷 43, 期 7, 页码 831-837

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/apt.13550

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundMarked epidemiological changes in upper gastrointestinal diseases and Helicobacter pylori infection have taken place in the Asian Pacific region. In particular, differences with respect to race in the multiracial Asian population in Malaysia have been important and interesting. AimA time trend study of upper gastrointestinal disease and H. pylori infection in three time periods: 1989-1990, 1999-2000 and 2009-2010 spanning a period of 20years was carried out. MethodsConsecutive first time gastroscopies carried out on patients attending the University of Malaya Medical Center were studied. Diagnoses and H. pylori infection status were carefully recorded. ResultsA steady decline in prevalence of duodenal ulcer (DU) and gastric ulcer (GU) from 21.1% to 9.5% to 5.0% and from 11.9% to 9.4% to 9.9% while an increase in erosive oesophagitis (EO) from 2.0% to 8.4% to 9.5% (chi-square for trend; P<0.001) for the periods 1989-1990, 1999-200 and 2009-2010 were observed. The overall prevalence of H. pylori had also decreased from 51.7% to 30.3% to 11.1% for the same periods of time. The proportion of H. pylori positive ulcers had also decreased: DU (90.1%-69.8%-28.9%) and GU (86.6-56.8%-18.9%) (P<0.001). This was observed in Malays, Chinese and Indians but the difference over time was most marked in Malays. There was a steady decline in the proportion of patients with gastric and oesophageal cancers. ConclusionsPeptic ulcers have declined significantly over a 20-year period together with a decline in H. pylori infection. In contrast, a steady increase in erosive oesophagitis was observed. Gastric and oesophageal squamous cell cancers have declined to low levels.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据