Advertisement

Journal of Gastroenterology

, Volume 54, Issue 5, pp 480–483 | Cite as

Correction to: Proton pump inhibitor monotherapy is effective to attenuate dyspepsia symptoms associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease: a multicenter prospective observational study

  • Kimio IsshiEmail author
  • Nobuyuki Matsuhashi
  • Takashi Joh
  • Kazuhide Higuchi
  • Katsuhiko Iwakiri
  • Takeshi Kamiya
  • Noriaki Manabe
  • Maiko Ogawa
  • Seiji Arihiro
  • Ken Haruma
  • Koji Nakada
Correction
  • 349 Downloads

Correction to: J Gastroenterol  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-019-01546-0

In the original publication of this article, Tables 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 were published incorrectly. The correct tables are given in this correction.

Table 2

Patients’ characteristics

 

Total (n = 233)

GERD-SS ≦ 2.5 mild symptom (n = 40)

GERD-SS 3.0–4.5 moderate symptom (n = 151)

GERD-SS ≧ 5.0 severe symptom (n = 42)

p-value

Mild vs moderate p-valuec

Moderate vs severe p-valuec

Mild vs severe p-valuec

Age (year)*

56.5 ± 14.1

56.7 ± 15.5

56.9 ± 13.0

54.7 ± 16.4

0.675a

0.996

0.652

0.804

BMI (kg/m2)*

23.7 ± 3.7

22.3 ± 3.3

23.8 ± 3.5

24.7 ± 4.5

0.014a

0.054

0.395

0.012

Gender: n (%)

0.007b

   

 Male

136 (58)

29 (73)

87 (58)

20 (48)

    

 Female

97 (42)

11 (28)

64 (42)

22 (52)

    

Endoscopic finding: n (%)

 NERD/ERD

 

0.725b

   

  NERD

94 (41)

18 (45)

58 (39)

18 (43)

    

  ERD

138 (59)

22 (55)

92 (61)

24 (57)

    

LA classification

 

0.916b

   

Grade N

58 (25)

12 (30)

34 (23)

12 (29)

    

Grade M

36 (16)

6 (15)

24 (16)

6 (14)

    

Grade A

71 (31)

12 (30)

45 (30)

14 (33)

    

Grade B

49 (21)

7 (18)

36 (24)

6 (14)

    

Grade C

16 (7)

3 (8)

9 (6)

4 (10)

    

Grade D

2 (1)

0 (0)

2 (1)

0 (0)

    

GERD gastroesophageal reflux disease, SS symptom subscale, BMI body mass index, NERD non-erosive reflux disease, ERD erosive reflux disease, LA Los Angeles

*Data are presented as mean ± SD

aanalysis of variance (ANOVA)

bChi-square test

cTukey test

Table 3

Comparison of the GERD and FD symptom scores at baseline among the groups divided by the severity of GERD-SS before PPI therapy

 

Total (n = 233)

GERD-SS ≦ 2.5 mild symptom

(n = 40)

GERD-SS 3.0–4.5 moderate symptom

(n = 151)

GERD-SS ≧ 5.0 severe symptom

(n = 42)

p-valuea

Mild vs moderate

Moderate vs severe

Mild vs severe

p-valueb

Cohen’s dc

p-valueb

Cohen’s dc

p-valueb

Cohen’s dc

GERD-SS*

3.7 ± 1.1

2.1 ± 0.4

3.6 ± 0.5

5.5 ± 0.6

< 0.001

< 0.001

2.88

< 0.001b

3.42

< 0.001b

6.54

FD-SS*

3.3 ± 0.9

2.6 ± 0.6

3.2 ± 0.7

4.3 ± 1.1

< 0.001

< 0.001

0.79

< 0.001b

1.43

< 0.001b

1.99

FD-EPS-Sx*

3.6 ± 1.2

2.6 ± 1.2

3.5 ± 0.9

4.8 ± 1.3

< 0.001

< 0.001

0.91

< 0.001b

1.28

< 0.001b

1.81

FD-PDS-SS*

3.0 ± 1.2

2.7 ± 1.0

2.9 ± 1.0

3.9 ± 1.3

< 0.001

0.521

0.21

< 0.001b

0.91

< 0.001b

1.05

SS symptom subscale, EPS epigastric pain syndrome, Sx symptom, PDS postprandial distress syndrome

*Data are presented as mean ± SD

aAnalysis of variance (ANOVA)

bTukey test

cInterpretation of effect size (Cohen’s d); ≧ 0.2:small, ≧ 0.5:medium, ≧ 0.8:large

Table 4

Comparison of the GERD and FD symptom scores between at before and at after 4 weeks of PPI therapy in the groups divided by the severity of GERD-SS at baseline

 

Total cases (n = 233)

GERD-SS ≦2.5 (n = 40) mild symptom

GERD-SS 3.0–4.5 (n = 151) moderate symptom

GERD-SS ≧ 5.0 (n = 42) severe symptom

Before Tx

After Tx

p-valuea

Cohen’s db

Before Tx

After Tx

p-valuea

Cohen’s db

Before Tx

After Tx

p-valuea

Cohen’s db

Before Tx

After Tx

p-valuea

Cohen’s db

GERD-SS*

3.7 ± 1.1

2.0 ± 1.1

< 0.001

1.47

2.1 ± 0.4

1.8 ± 1.0

0.030

0.58

3.6 ± 0.5

2.0 ± 1.0

< 0.001

1.91

5.5 ± 0.6

2.5 ± 1.4

< 0.001

3.35

FD-SS*

3.3 ± 0.9

2.1 ± 0.1

< 0.001

1.24

2.6 ± 0.6

2.2 ± 1.0

0.018

0.64

3.2 ± 0.7

2.0 ± 0.9

< 0.001

1.50

4.3 ± 1.1

2.5 ± 1.2

< 0.001

1.69

FD-EPS-Sx*

3.6 ± 1.2

2.1 ± 1.2

< 0.001

1.29

2.6 ± 1.2

1.9 ± 1.2

0.008

0.59

3.5 ± 0.9

2.0 ± 1.1

< 0.001

1.52

4.8 ± 1.3

2.5 ± 1.4

< 0.001

1.79

FD-PDS-SS*

3.0 ± 1.2

2.1 ± 1.0

< 0.001

0.82

2.7 ± 1.0

2.4 ± 1.1

0.273

0.25

2.9 ± 1.0

2.0 ± 0.9

< 0.001

0.95

3.9 ± 1.3

2.5 ± 1.2

< 0.001

1.06

Tx treatment

*Data are presented as mean ± SD

apaired t-test

bInterpretation of effect size (Cohen’s d); ≧0.2: small, ≧0.5: medium, ≧0.8: large

Table 5

Comparison of the GERD and FD symptom score changes by 4 weeks of PPI therapy among the groups divided by the severity of GERD-SS at baseline

 

Total (n = 233)

GERD-SS ≦ 2.5 mild symptom (n = 40)

GERD-SS 3.0–4.5

moderate symptom (n = 151)

GERD-SS ≧5.0 severe symptom (n = 42)

p-valuea

Mild vs moderate

Moderate vs severe

Mild vs severe

p-valueb

Cohen’s dc

p-valueb

Cohen’s dc

p-valueb

Cohen’s dc

Δ GERD-SS*

− 1.7 ± 1.4

− 0.4 ± 1.0

− 1.6 ± 1.1

− 3.0 ± 1.5

< 0.001

<0.001

1.14

< 0.001

1.14

< 0.001

2.06

Δ FD-SS*

− 1.2 ± 1.2

− 0.5 ± 1.2

− 1.2 ± 1.0

− 1.9 ± 1.5

< 0.001

<0.001

0.73

0.003

0.59

< 0.001

1.04

Δ FD-EPS-Sx*

− 1.5 ± 1.5

− 0.7 ± 1.6

− 1.5 ± 1.3

− 2.3 ± 2.0

< 0.001

0.0043

0.63

0.0058

0.56

< 0.001

0.93

Δ FD-PDS-SS*

− 0.9 ± 1.2

− 0.3 ± 1.4

− 0.9 ± 1.0

− 1.4 ± 1.3

< 0.001

0.005

0.58

0.0411

0.45

< 0.001

0.84

Δ change in symptom score (symptom score at 4 weeks of PPI therapy—symptom score at baseline)

*Data are presented as mean ± SD

aanalysis of variance (ANOVA)

bTukey test

cInterpretation of effect size (Cohen’s d); ≧0.2: small, ≧0.5: medium, ≧0.8: large

Table 6

Effect of factors on FD−SS score changes by 4 weeks of PPI therapy (n = 233)

Multiple regression analysis

Factor

β *

p-value

Endoscopic findings (NERD)

GERD-SS

0.090

− 0.411

0.1355

< 0.001

R2**

0.173

< 0.001

Interpretation of effect size

β

R 2

None or very small

< 0.100

< 0.020

Small

≧ 0.100

≧ 0.020

Medium

≧ 0.300

≧ 0.130

Large

≧ 0.500

≧ 0.260

*β standardized regression coefficient

**R2: coefficient of determination

Copyright information

© Japanese Society of Gastroenterology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kimio Isshi
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Nobuyuki Matsuhashi
    • 3
  • Takashi Joh
    • 4
  • Kazuhide Higuchi
    • 5
  • Katsuhiko Iwakiri
    • 6
  • Takeshi Kamiya
    • 7
  • Noriaki Manabe
    • 8
  • Maiko Ogawa
    • 9
  • Seiji Arihiro
    • 9
  • Ken Haruma
    • 10
  • Koji Nakada
    • 11
  1. 1.Isshi Gastro-Intestinal ClinicTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of EndoscopyJikei University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Department of GastroenterologyNTT Medical Center TokyoTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Gamagori City HospitalGamagori-City, AichiJapan
  5. 5.Second Department of Internal MedicineOsaka Medical CollegeTakatsukiJapan
  6. 6.Department of GastroenterologyNippon Medical School Graduate School of MedicineTokyoJapan
  7. 7.Department of Medical InnovationNagoya City University Graduate School Medical SciencesNagoyaJapan
  8. 8.Division of Endoscopy and Ultrasonography, Department of Laboratory MedicineKawasaki Medical School General Medical CenterOkayama-CityJapan
  9. 9.Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal MedicineKatsushika Medical Center Jikei University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
  10. 10.Department of General Internal Medicine 2Kawasaki Medical School Kawasaki HospitalKurashikiJapan
  11. 11.Department of Laboratory MedicineThe Jikei University Daisan HospitalTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations