AIM: To compare ecabet sodium and cimetidine in relieving symptoms of functional dyspepsia. METHODS: We performed a multi-center, prospective, randomized, double-blinded controlled trial to compare the clinical efficacy of ecabet sodium and cimetidine in patients with functional dyspepsia. Two-hundred and seventy-two patients with dyspeptic symptoms fulfilling the Rome-II criteria were enrolled from 7 centers. In the study group (115 patients), 1.5 g ecabet sodium was given twice a day. In the control group (121 patients), 400 mg cimetidine was given twice a day. Symptoms and parameters of quality of life were analyzed at baseline, 3, 14, and 28 d after initiating the treatment. RESULTS: Two-hundred and thirty-six patients completed the clinical trial. After 4 wk of treatment, the rates of improvement in patients with dyspeptic symptoms were not different between two groups (77.4% in the ecabet group and 79.3% in the cimetidine group, respectively, P > 0.05). Likewise, the rates of symptomatic improvement were not different at 3 d and 14 d. The parameters of quality of life did not change significantly during the study period in both groups. There was no clinically significant adverse event in both groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with functional dyspepsia, ecabet sodium has similar clinical efficacy with cimetidine. AIM: To compare eccetine sodium and cimetidine in relieving symptoms of functional dyspepsia. METHODS: We performed a multi-center, prospective, randomized, double-blinded controlled trial to compare the clinical efficacy of ecabet sodium and cimetidine in patients with functional dyspepsia. Two -hundred and seventy-two patients with dyspeptic symptoms fulfilling the Rome-II criteria were enrolled from 7 centers. In the study group (115 patients), 1.5 g ecabet sodium was given twice a day. In the control group (121 patients), 400 mg cimetidine was given twice a day. Symptoms and parameters of quality of life were analyzed at baseline, 3, 14, and 28 days after initiating the treatment. RESULTS: Two-hundred and thirty-six patients completed the clinical trial. After 4 wk of treatment, the rates of improvement in patients with dyspeptic symptoms were not different between two groups (77.4% in the ecabet group and 79.3% in the cimetidine group, respectively, P> 0.05). The parameters of quality of life did not change significantly during the study period in both groups. There was no clinically significant adverse event in both groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with functional dyspepsia, ecabet sodium has similar clinical efficacy with cimetidine.