Publication:
Efficacy and safety of nortriptyline in functional dyspepsia in Asians: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial

dc.contributor.authorUayporn Kaosombatwattanaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSupot Pongprasobchaien_US
dc.contributor.authorJulajak Limsrivilaien_US
dc.contributor.authorMonthira Maneerattanapornen_US
dc.contributor.authorSomchai Leelakusolvongen_US
dc.contributor.authorTawesak Tanwandeeen_US
dc.contributor.otherFaculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-28T06:24:37Z
dc.date.available2019-08-28T06:24:37Z
dc.date.issued2018-02-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2017 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd Background and Aim: Current treatments of functional dyspepsia (FD) are unsatisfied. Tricyclic antidepressants alter visceral hypersensitivity and brain–gut interaction. We assessed the efficacy and safety of nortriptyline in patients with FD. Methods: Patients diagnosed with FD according to Rome III criteria who failed to respond to proton pump inhibitor and prokinetic treatment were randomly assigned to either once daily 10-mg nortriptyline or placebo. The primary endpoint was the rate of responders defined as > 50% reduction in dyspepsia symptom score after 8 weeks of treatment. The secondary endpoints were improvement in quality of life as assessed by 36-Item Short Form Health Survey score and safety. Results: Sixty-one patients (nortriptyline 28 and placebo 33) were enrolled. Dyspepsia symptom score and duration of symptoms were balanced at entry between both groups. Eight and seven patients in nortriptyline and placebo groups were lost to follow up. Seven patients withdrew due to mild adverse events (nortriptyline 1 and placebo 6). Overall, 19 with nortriptyline and 20 with placebo completed the study. Patients receiving nortriptyline did not achieve higher response rate than those in placebo in both intention-to-treat (53.6% vs 57.6%, P = 0.75) and per-protocol (76.5% vs 73.7%, P = 1.00) analyses. Nortriptyline did not provide improvement in quality of life. The mean difference was 3.8 (P = 0.36) and 0.88 (P = 0.86) by intention-to-treat and 2.9 (P = 0.57) and 3.5 (P = 0.57) by per-protocol analyses in physical and mental component, respectively. All adverse events were minor and similar in both groups. Conclusion: Nortriptyline was not superior to placebo in management of patients with FD.en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia). Vol.33, No.2 (2018), 411-417en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jgh.13914en_US
dc.identifier.issn14401746en_US
dc.identifier.issn08159319en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85041091472en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/46956
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85041091472&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleEfficacy and safety of nortriptyline in functional dyspepsia in Asians: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trialen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85041091472&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections