Search PubMedSearch

Biomedical subjects

R Bath

Publications and source records attributed to R Bath.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

A randomized trial comparing the effect of rofecoxib, a cyclooxygenase 2-specific inhibitor, with that of ibuprofen on the gastroduodenal mucosa of patients with osteoarthritis. Rofecoxib Osteoarthritis Endoscopy Study Group.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Prostaglandin production in the normal gastrointestinal tract, believed to be critical for mucosal integrity, is mediated by cyclooxygenase (COX)-1, whereas prostaglandin production at inflammatory sites seems to occur via induction of COX-2. We hypothesized that COX-2-specific inhibition with rofecoxib (25 mg once daily) in the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis would cause fewer gastroduodenal ulcers than an equally effective dose of ibuprofen (800 mg 3 times a day), a nonspecific COX inhibitor. METHODS: A total of 742 osteoarthritis patients without ulcers on baseline endoscopy were randomly assigned to receive rofecoxib (25 or 50 mg once daily), ibuprofen (800 mg 3 times daily), or placebo. Endoscopy was repeated at 6, 12, and 24 weeks. At 16 weeks, by study design, 95% of the placebo group and 5% of the other groups were discontinued. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers >/=3 mm with rofecoxib (25 or 50 mg once daily) was significantly (P < 0.001) lower than with ibuprofen and was statistically equivalent to placebo at week 12 (placebo, 9.9%; 25 mg rofecoxib, 4.1%; 50 mg rofecoxib, 7.3%; and ibuprofen, 27.7%). At 24 weeks, ulcer rates were 25 mg rofecoxib, 9. 6%; 50 mg rofecoxib, 14.7%; and ibuprofen, 45.8% (P < 0.001, ibuprofen vs. 25 and 50 mg rofecoxib). CONCLUSIONS: Rofecoxib, at doses 2-4 times the dose demonstrated to relieve symptoms of osteoarthritis, caused significantly less gastroduodenal ulceration than ibuprofen, with ulcer rates comparable to placebo.

Aged

Nocturnal enuresis and the use of desmopressin: is it helpful?

We assessed the outcome of the use of an enuretic alarm and desmopressin according to conventional guidelines and investigated the reasons for resistance to desmopressin. Children were given a 4 month course using an enuretic alarm if they had not previously used one; 12 out of 21 were dry (57%) after 4 months and one relapsed 1 month later. Those who had previously failed with an alarm or were considered poorly motivated to use it, were given a 4 month course of intranasal desmopressin. Of these 26 children, 10 (38%) were dry at the end of 4 months but only two (7%) remained dry after this was withdrawn. After the initial treatment with alarm or desmopressin, 27 children were still enuretic and attending the clinic. They were shown how to use the alarm and eight also used the dry bed training technique: 15 had become dry after a further 6 months. Of the 12 children who made no response to intranasal desmopressin, nine were given this medication under supervision in hospital; seven of these children still wet the bed despite producing small amounts of concentrated urine overnight. They also had small measured diurnal bladder capacities. We conclude that if a 4 month course with an enuretic alarm is unsuccessful, rather than using desmopressin, the alarm should be continued with relearning and consideration given to additional use of the dry bed training technique. The major factor causing nocturnal enuresis in children is likely to be a small nocturnal bladder capacity.

Administration, Intranasal