Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The objective: to evaluate the clinical efficacy and tolerability of Gastritol® oral drops in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). Materials and methods. A multicenter, open-label, controlled study was conducted involving 533 patients aged 18–45 years with diagnosed FD. The study group (SG) – 288 patients – received standard therapy (a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and a prokinetic/antispasmodic) combined with Gastritol® (20–30 drops 3 times daily). The control group (CG) – 245 patients – received the standard regimen only. Evaluation was performed using the Gastrointestinal Symptom Score (GIS), a physician-rated scale, and quality of life parameters on the 1st and 21st days of treatment. Statistical analysis was performed using R environment (version 4.5.1). Results. The addition of Gastritol® provided a statistically significant advantage in symptom relief compared to standard therapy (PPIs + prokinetic/antispasmodic), p < 0.001. The most pronounced dynamics in the SG were observed regarding epigastric pain, feeling of fullness, bloating, and early satiety. The clinical success rate (4–5 points on the physician-rated scale) in the Gastritol® group was 83.7% vs 52.2% in CG (p < 0.0001). The chances of successful treatment increased 4.69-fold (Odds Ratio = 4.69; 95% Confidence Interval [3.14; 7.00]), with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 3.2. Combined therapy was associated with a significantly higher level of compliance (96.5% vs 86.9%) and substantial improvement in patients’ psychoemotional and physical well-being (p < 0.0001). Conclusions. Inclusion of Gastritol® in standard treatment protocols for FD allows for more profound and rapid relief of dyspeptic syndrome. The drug demonstrates a favorable safety profile and high clinical significance, ensuring recovery for every third additional patient. The multi-target action of the herbal extracts contributes to effective restoration of quality of life and increased treatment adherence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bondarenko et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: