S838 On-Demand vs Continuous Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy for GERD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the mainstay for long-term management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, concerns regarding the adverse effects of prolonged use have led to increased interest in on-demand therapy as a potential alternative to continuous use. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of on-demand versus continuous PPI therapy for GERD maintenance. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across major databases from inception to 2025 to identify RCTs comparing on-demand and continuous PPI therapy in adult GERD patients. In this analysis, on-demand therapy was designated as the experimental group and continuous therapy as the control group. The primary outcome was treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included symptom relief. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. For binary outcomes, odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Results: Twelve randomized controlled trials comprising 6,089 GERD patients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome, treatment failure, was not significantly different between on-demand and continuous PPI therapy (RD 0.03; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.07; P = 0.15; I² = 87%). For secondary outcomes, on-demand therapy was associated with significantly lower symptom relief compared to continuous therapy (OR 1.94; 95% CI 1.37-2.73; P < 0.005; I² = 80%). Importantly, on-demand use resulted in a substantial reduction in total PPI consumption, with several studies reporting up to a 50% decrease in cumulative use. Subgroup analysis suggested that on-demand therapy provided similar efficacy in patients with non-erosive or mild erosive disease, while continuous therapy appeared more effective in moderate-to-severe esophagitis. Sensitivity analyses excluding high-risk-of-bias studies confirmed the consistency and robustness of the findings. Conclusion: On-demand PPI therapy appears to be a safe and effective alternative to continuous therapy for the maintenance treatment of GERD in appropriately selected patients. While it may offer slightly less symptom relief, it achieves comparable treatment durability with a significant reduction in overall PPI exposure. These findings support its consideration in patients with non-erosive or mild erosive disease to minimize long-term medication use.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14309/01.ajg.0001130812.50127.2a
Primary Topic
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

S838 On-Demand vs Continuous Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy for GERD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Sunny Kumar, Sushrut Ingawale, Anila Mahesh, Fnu Arti et al.
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
article

S838 On-Demand vs Continuous Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy for GERD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Sunny Kumar, Sushrut Ingawale, Anila Mahesh, Fnu Arti, Ashok Kumar, Shubh Mehta, Rahul Kumar, Rubela Ray, Fnu Aakash, Avinash Nankani
article en

Abstract

Introduction: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the mainstay for long-term management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, concerns regarding the adverse effects of prolonged use have led to increased interest in on-demand therapy as a potential alternative to continuous use. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of on-demand versus continuous PPI therapy for GERD maintenance. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across major databases from inception to 2025 to identify RCTs comparing on-demand and continuous PPI therapy in adult GERD patients. In this analysis, on-demand therapy was designated as the experimental group and continuous therapy as the control group. The primary outcome was treatment failure. Secondary outcomes included symptom relief. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. For binary outcomes, odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Results: Twelve randomized controlled trials comprising 6,089 GERD patients were included in the analysis. The primary outcome, treatment failure, was not significantly different between on-demand and continuous PPI therapy (RD 0.03; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.07; P = 0.15; I² = 87%). For secondary outcomes, on-demand therapy was associated with significantly lower symptom relief compared to continuous therapy (OR 1.94; 95% CI 1.37-2.73; P < 0.005; I² = 80%). Importantly, on-demand use resulted in a substantial reduction in total PPI consumption, with several studies reporting up to a 50% decrease in cumulative use. Subgroup analysis suggested that on-demand therapy provided similar efficacy in patients with non-erosive or mild erosive disease, while continuous therapy appeared more effective in moderate-to-severe esophagitis. Sensitivity analyses excluding high-risk-of-bias studies confirmed the consistency and robustness of the findings. Conclusion: On-demand PPI therapy appears to be a safe and effective alternative to continuous therapy for the maintenance treatment of GERD in appropriately selected patients. While it may offer slightly less symptom relief, it achieves comparable treatment durability with a significant reduction in overall PPI exposure. These findings support its consideration in patients with non-erosive or mild erosive disease to minimize long-term medication use.

The American Journal of GastroenterologyVol. 120(10S2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Gastroesophageal reflux and treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.