Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 339

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bacterial overgrowth during treatment with omeprazole compared with cimetidine: a prospective randomised double blind study.

Open access
Thorens, J, Froehlich, F, Schwizer, W, Saraga, E, Bille, J, Gyr, K, Duroux, P, Nicolet, M, Pignatelli, B, Blum, A L, Gonvers, J J, Fried, M·1996·Gut

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Gastric and duodenal bacterial overgrowth frequently occurs in conditions where diminished acid secretion is present. Omeprazole inhibits acid secretion more effectively than cimetidine and might therefore more frequently cause bacterial overgrowth. AIM: This controlled prospective study compared the incidence of gastric and duodenal bacterial overgrowth in patients treated with omeprazole or cimetidine. METHODS: 47 outpatients with peptic disease were randomly assigned to a four week treatment regimen with omeprazole 20 mg or cimetidine 800 mg daily. Gastric and duodenal juice were obtained during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and plated for anaerobic and aerobic organisms. RESULTS: Bacterial overgrowth (> or = 10(5) cfu/ml) was present in 53% of the patients receiving omeprazole and in 17% receiving cimetidine (p < 0.05). The mean (SEM) number of gastric and duodenal bacterial counts was 6.0 (0.2) and 5.0 (0.2) respectively in the omeprazole group and 4.0 (0.2) and 4.0 (0.1) in the cimetidine group (p < 0.001 and < 0.01; respectively). Faecal type bacteria were found in 30% of the patients with bacterial overgrowth. Basal gastric pH was higher in patients treated with omeprazole compared with cimetidine (4.2 (0.5) versus 2.0 (0.2); p < 0.001) and in patients with bacterial overgrowth compared with those without bacterial overgrowth (5.1 (0.6) versus 2.0 (0.1); p < 0.0001). The nitrate, nitrite, and nitrosamine values in gastric juice did not increase after treatment with either cimetidine or omeprazole. Serum concentrations of vitamin B12, beta carotene, and albumin were similar before and after treatment with both drugs. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the incidence of gastric and duodenal bacterial overgrowth is considerably higher in patients treated with omeprazole compared with cimetidine. This can be explained by more pronounced inhibition of gastric acid secretion. No patient developed signs of malabsorption or an increase of N-nitroso compounds. The clinical significance of these findings needs to be assessed in studies with long-term treatment with omeprazole, in particular in patients belonging to high risk groups such as HIV infected and intensive care units patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.39.1.54

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 40 references

Cited by

See all 339

Metadata

Authors
Thorens, J., Froehlich, F., Schwizer, W., Saraga, E., Bille, J., Gyr, K., Duroux, P., Nicolet, M., Pignatelli, B., Blum, A. L., Gonvers, J. J., & Fried, M.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1996-07
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
54-59
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2100084977
Cited by
339
References
40
FWCI
7.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bacterial overgrowth during treatment with omeprazole compared with cimetidine: a prospective randomised double blind study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.39.1.54
The paper
Thorens, J., Froehlich, F., Schwizer, W., Saraga, E., Bille, J., Gyr, K., Duroux, P., Nicolet, M., Pignatelli, B., Blum, A. L., Gonvers, J. J., & Fried, M. (1996). Bacterial overgrowth during treatment with omeprazole compared with cimetidine: a prospective randomised double blind study. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.39.1.54

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.