Narrative reviewindependent cross-checkabstract checked I-SOD-110 standard review

Ulcers are mainly caused by H. pylori and painkillers

Peptic ulcer disease.

Overview

Lanas A, Chan FKL. Lancet 2017 · PMID 28242110 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32404-7

A Lancet review describes Helicobacter pylori infection and anti-inflammatory painkillers as the central causes of stomach and duodenal ulcers.

Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Review causes and treatment of peptic ulcers.

How was the study done?

Expert narrative review.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

Not applicable.

What was actually found?

Ulcers are mainly linked to H. pylori and NSAIDs.

How large was the observed effect?

Not applicable.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

People with ulcer symptoms need testing for H. pylori and a review of painkiller use, not only a drink ban.

What are the study's limitations?

Narrative review.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Contradicts the claim that cola is a main cause of ulcers.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Applicable.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Does not test soft drinks directly.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Lanas A, Chan FKL
Journal
Lancet
Year
2017
Identifier
PMID 28242110 DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32404-7
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26 + Crossref 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

Not stated in abstract record

2. Research question

What are the causes, management and challenges of peptic ulcer disease?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Narrative review – Lancet Seminar (narrative review)
Population

Not applicable

Country

International

Period

2017

Sample size

Not applicable

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Not applicable

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Helicobacter pylori infection; NSAIDs/antithrombotics

Comparator

Not applicable

Endpoints

Peptic ulcer disease and complications

Statistical methods

Not applicable

5. Actual results

Results

The declining prevalence of H. pylori infection and use of potent anti-secretory drugs have made peptic ulcer disease less prevalent; management focuses on H. pylori therapy and on ulcers associated with anti-inflammatory analgesics and antithrombotic agents; ulcers not associated with H. pylori or NSAIDs are described as a separate, increasingly challenging group.

Absolute risks

not applicable

Authors' conclusion

Overview of pathogenesis and management; H. pylori and NSAIDs are the central aetiological factors addressed.

6. Strengths

  • Authoritative Lancet seminar

7. Weaknesses

  • Narrative; abstract only reviewed
  • Does not address soft drinks explicitly

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
none applicable
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
not assessable
Rationale

Narrative review.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

Not applicable.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Contradicts the claim that soft drinks (Pepsi) are among the main causes of gastritis and ulcers: the established main causes are H. pylori infection and NSAIDs.

11. Independent contrary findings

No study linking soft drinks to peptic ulcer was found in searches (see the project's research log).

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Applicable; H. pylori prevalence is higher in Egypt than in Northern Europe, which strengthens the point for Egypt.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Supports the established aetiology of ulcers; no role for soft drinks is described.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biasnot assessable
Precision of resultsnot applicable
Directnessindirect
Reproducibilityreplicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

None for the claim.

15. Linked fact checks