In patients receiving invasive ventilation, PPIs reduce upper GI bleeding but did not affect mortality at 90 d

Melissa Carroll,Nicholas J Talley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/ANNALS-24-02088-JC

Abstract:Cook D, Deane A, Lauzier F, et al; REVISE Investigators. Stress ulcer prophylaxis during invasive mechanical ventilation. N Engl J Med. 2024;391:9-20. 38875111.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis during Invasive Mechanical Ventilation

Deborah Cook,Adam Deane,François Lauzier,Nicole Zytaruk,Gordon Guyatt,Lois Saunders,Miranda Hardie,Diane Heels-Ansdell,Waleed Alhazzani,John Marshall,John Muscedere,John Myburgh,Shane English,Yaseen M Arabi,Marlies Ostermann,Serena Knowles,Naomi Hammond,Kathleen M Byrne,Marianne Chapman,Balasubramanian Venkatesh,Paul Young,Dorrilyn Rajbhandari,Alexis Poole,Abdulrahman Al-Fares,Gilmar Reis,Daniel Johnson,Mobeen Iqbal,Richard Hall,Maureen Meade,Lori Hand,Erick Duan,France Clarke,Joanna C Dionne,Jennifer L Y Tsang,Bram Rochwerg,Timothy Karachi,Francois Lamontagne,Frédérick D'Aragon,Charles St Arnaud,Brenda Reeve,Anna Geagea,Daniel Niven,Gloria Vazquez-Grande,Ryan Zarychanski,Daniel Ovakim,Gordon Wood,Karen E A Burns,Alberto Goffi,M Elizabeth Wilcox,William Henderson,David Forrest,Rob Fowler,Neill K J Adhikari,Ian Ball,Tina Mele,Alexandra Binnie,Sebastien Trop,Sangeeta Mehta,Ingrid Morgan,Osama Loubani,Meredith Vanstone,Kirsten Fiest,Emmanuel Charbonney,Yiorgos A Cavayas,Patrick Archambault,Oleksa G Rewa,Vincent Lau,Arnold S Kristof,Kosar Khwaja,David Williamson,Salmaan Kanji,Eric Sy,Brittany Dennis,Steve Reynolds,Francois Marquis,François Lellouche,Adam Rahman,Paul Hosek,Jeffrey F Barletta,Robert Cirrone,Mark Tutschka,Feng Xie,Laurent Billot,Lehana Thabane,Simon Finfer,REVISE Investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2404245

2024-07-04

Abstract:Background: Whether proton-pump inhibitors are beneficial or harmful for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients undergoing invasive ventilation is unclear. Methods: In this international, randomized trial, we assigned critically ill adults who were undergoing invasive ventilation to receive intravenous pantoprazole (at a dose of 40 mg daily) or matching placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU) at 90 days, and the primary safety outcome was death from any cause at 90 days. Multiplicity-adjusted secondary outcomes included ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, and patient-important bleeding. Results: A total of 4821 patients underwent randomization in 68 ICUs. Clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 25 of 2385 patients (1.0%) receiving pantoprazole and in 84 of 2377 patients (3.5%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.47; P<0.001). At 90 days, death was reported in 696 of 2390 patients (29.1%) in the pantoprazole group and in 734 of 2379 patients (30.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.04; P = 0.25). Patient-important bleeding was reduced with pantoprazole; all other secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups. Conclusions: Among patients undergoing invasive ventilation, pantoprazole resulted in a significantly lower risk of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding than placebo, with no significant effect on mortality. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; REVISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374800.).
A pragmatic assessment of proton pump inhibitors vs. histamine type 2 receptor antagonists on clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding and mortality when used for stress ulcer prophylaxis in the ICU

Carly Boyd,Tanna Hassig,Robert MacLaren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/phar.2621

2021-09-12

Abstract:ObjectiveApproximately 1-5% of critically ill patients experience clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding (CIGB). This study assessed the effectiveness and safety of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) compared to histamine type 2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) for prevention of CIGB in mechanically ventilated patients. DesignRetrospective, single-center, pharmacoepidemiolgic study. SettingSix intensive care units (ICUs). PatientsCritically ill adults admitted between 9/1/14 and 9/1/19 who received PPIs or H2RAs within 24 hours of intubation and for ≥ 48 hours. Measurements and Main ResultsPrimary outcomes were CIGB occurring 48 hours after ICU admission and hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), acute kidney injury, myocardial infarction / ischemia, thrombocytopenia, and delirium. Outcomes were defined using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and Tenth Revision (ICD-10)-codes with manual cross reference for a hemoglobin drop, transfusion, or hemodynamic compromise to further define CIGB. Of 3,873 patients, 2,061 (53.2%%) received PPIs. CIGB was rare but higher in the PPI group (0.34% vs. 0%, RR=1, 95% CI, 1-1; p=0.013); however substantial group differences existed possibly predisposing the PPI group to CIGB. Hospital mortality was higher in the PPI group (42.1% vs. 29.1%, RR=1.23, 95% CI, 1.17-1.29; p<0.0001). PPIs remained an independent risk factor for mortality after multivariate adjustment (RR=1.61, 95% CI, 1.39-1.88; p<0.0001). Rates of secondary outcomes were similar between groups except thrombocytopenia (4.3% vs. 2.2%, RR=1.02, 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; p=0.0003) and delirium (83.7% vs. 78.1%, RR=1.34, 95% CI, 1.18-1.53; p<0.0001) that were higher in the PPI group. ConclusionPPIs were associated with CIGB; however, the overall rate of CIGB was low. Compared to H2RAs, PPIs were associated with hospital mortality. Further identification of appropriate selection criteria for ulcer prophylaxis and comparisons of pharmacologic prevention strategies are warranted.
Proton pump inhibitors for gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: A systematic review protocol

Ying Wang,Diane Heels‐Ansdell,Long Ge,Sameer Parpia,Quazi Ibrahim,Deborah Cook,Adam Deane,Francois Lauzier,Naomi Hammond,Morten H. Møller,Mette Krag,Anders Perner,Gordon H. Guyatt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14426

2024-04-07

Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica

Abstract:Background Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most commonly prescribed drugs for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients. However, concerns have arisen about the possible harms of using PPIs, including potentially increased risk of pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, and more seriously, an increased risk of death in the most severely ill patients. Triggered by the REVISE trial, which is a forthcoming large randomized trial comparing pantoprazole to placebo in invasively mechanically ventilated patients, we will conduct this systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PPIs versus no prophylaxis for critically ill patients. Methods We will systematically search randomized trials that compared gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis with PPIs versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adults in the intensive care unit (ICU). Pairs of reviewers will independently screen the literature, and for those eligible trials, extract data and assess risk of bias. We will perform meta‐analyses using a random‐effects model, and calculate relative risks for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, and the associated 95% confidence intervals. We will conduct subgroup analysis to explore whether the impact of PPIs on mortality differs in more and less severely ill patients. We will assess certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Discussion This systematic review will provide the most up‐to‐date evidence regarding the merits and limitations of stress ulcer prophylaxis with PPIs in critically ill patients in contemporary practice.

anesthesiology
Proton pump inhibitors in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: protocol for a substudy of the Re-EValuating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) Trial

Brittany B Dennis,Lehana Thabane,Diane Heels-Ansdell,Joanna C Dionne,Alexandra Binnie,Jennifer Tsang,Gordon Guyatt,Aijaz Ahmed,François Lauzier,Adam Deane,Yaseen Arabi,John Marshall,Nicole Zytaruk,Lois Saunders,Simon Finfer,John Myburgh,John Muscedere,Shane English,Marlies Ostermann,Miranda Hardie,Serena Knowles,Deborah Cook,REVISE Investigators the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07589-2

IF: 2.728

2023-08-30

Trials

Abstract:Background: Critically ill patients commonly receive proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding from stress-induced ulceration. Despite widespread use in the intensive care unit (ICU), observational data suggest that PPIs may be associated with adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 infection. This preplanned study is nested within a large randomized trial evaluating pantoprazole versus placebo in invasively ventilated patients. The 3 objectives are as follows: (1) to describe the characteristics of patients with COVID-19 in terms of demographics, biomarkers, venous thromboembolism, tracheostomy incidence and timing, and other clinical outcomes; (2) to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 infection on clinically important GI bleeding, 90-day mortality, and other outcomes compared to a propensity-matched non-infected cohort; and (3) to explore whether pantoprazole has a differential treatment effect on clinically important GI bleeding, 90-day mortality, and other outcomes in patients with and without COVID-19 infection. Methods: The ongoing trial Re-EValuating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) compares pantoprazole 40 mg IV to placebo on the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important GI bleeding and the primary safety outcome of 90-day mortality. The protocol described in this report is for a substudy focused on patients with COVID-19 infection that was not in the original pre-pandemic trial protocol. We developed a one-page case report form to characterize these patients including data related to biomarkers, venous thromboembolism, COVID-19 therapies, tracheostomy incidence and timing, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU and hospital stay. Our analysis will describe the trajectory of patients with COVID-19 infection, a propensity-matched analysis of infected and non-infected patients, and an extended subgroup analysis comparing the effect of PPI among patients with and without COVID-19 infection. Discussion: Prophylactic acid suppression in invasively ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection has unknown consequences. The results of these investigations will inform practice, guidelines, and future research. Trial registration: REVISE Trial [NCT03374800 December 15, 2017], COVID-19 Cohort Study [NCT05715567 February 8, 2023].
Association of Proton Pump Inhibitor Prophylaxis on Clinical Outcome in Acute Ischemic Stroke in China: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

Lei Fang,Wansi Zhong,Xiaoxian Gong,Zhicai Chen,Yi Chen,Shenqiang Yan,Min Lou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11236881

IF: 3.9

2022-01-01

Journal of Clinical Medicine

Abstract:Background: Overtreatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients continues to grow. We aimed to investigate the frequency of PPI prophylaxis without an appropriate indication in AIS patients in China and clarify the association between PPI prophylaxis and long-term prognosis. Methods: Based on a multicenter stroke registry database, neurological outcomes, stroke events, recurrent ischemic strokes, and all-cause death were compared between patients with and without PPI prophylaxis. Results: A total of 4542 AIS were included, and 3335 (73.4%) received PPI prophylaxis. Patients with PPI prophylaxis were more likely to have a poor outcome at 1 year than those without PPI prophylaxis (33.3% vs. 25.8%, OR 1.321; 95% CI 1.102–1.584; p = 0.003). No significant differences were found in all-cause death, stroke event, or recurrent ischemic stroke at 1 year between the two groups. After propensity score matching, PPI prophylaxis was still independently associated with a higher rate of poor outcome (30.9% vs. 25.8%, OR 1.432; 95% CI 1.151–1.780; p = 0.001). Sensitivity analysis also showed that PPI prophylaxis increased the rate of a poor outcome in minor strokes or at different durations of PPI prophylaxis. Conclusions: Approximately 3/4 of AIS patients were given PPI prophylaxis during hospitalization, which was associated with a poor long-term outcome.
[Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitors on In-Stent Restenosis in Patients Receiving Clopidogrel: a Retrospective Analysis].

Zhan-lu Li,Bin-quan Zhou,Jun-hui Zhu,Guo-sheng Fu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3785/j.issn.1008-9292.2011.06.016

2011-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To determine the effect of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) on in-stent restenosis (ISR) in patients receiving clopidogrel therapy.METHODS:Total 439 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled in the study,including 250 post-PCI patients discharged on clopidogrel alone and 189 patients discharged on clopidogrel with PPI. The in-stent restenosis (ISR) ratio of the patients in these two groups were observed.RESULTS:During a mean follow-up period of (13 ± 5.9) months, the post-PCI patients discharged on concomitant clopidogrel-PPI therapy had higher risk of ISR than those discharged on clopidogrel alone (19.6% Compared with 8%, P<0.001).CONCLUSION:Concomitant use of clopidogrel and PPI after hospital discharge would increase the risk of ISR for post-PCI patients.
Proton-Pump Inhibitors to Prevent Gastrointestinal Bleeding - An Updated Meta-Analysis

Ying Wang,Sameer Parpia,Long Ge,Diane Heels-Ansdell,Honghao Lai,Meisam Abdar Esfahani,Bei Pan,Waleed Alhazzani,Stefan Schandelmaier,Francois Lauzier,Yaseen Arabi,Jeffrey Barletta,Adam Deane,Simon Finfer,David Williamson,Salmaan Kanji,Morten H Møller,Anders Perner,Mette Krag,Paul J Young,Joanna C Dionne,Naomi Hammond,Zhikang Ye,Quazi Ibrahim,Deborah Cook

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/EVIDoa2400134

Abstract:Background: The goal of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy and safety of proton-pump inhibitors for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients. Methods: We included randomized trials comparing proton-pump inhibitors versus placebo or no prophylaxis in critically ill adults, performed meta-analyses, and assessed certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. To explore the effect of proton-pump inhibitors on mortality based on disease severity, a subgroup analysis was conducted combining within-trial subgroup data from the two largest trials and assessed credibility using the Instrument for Assessing the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses. Results: Twelve trials that enrolled 9533 patients were included. Proton-pump inhibitors were associated with a reduced incidence of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding (relative risk [RR], 0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34 to 0.76]; high certainty evidence). Proton-pump inhibitors may have little or no effect on mortality (RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.05]; low certainty). Within-trial subgroup analysis with intermediate credibility suggested that the effect of proton-pump inhibitors on mortality may differ based on disease severity. Subgroup results raise the possibility that proton-pump inhibitors may decrease 90-day mortality in less severely ill patients (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.98) and may increase mortality in more severely ill patients (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.20]. Proton-pump inhibitors may have no effect on pneumonia and little or no effect on Clostridioides difficile infection (low certainty). Conclusions: High certainty evidence supports the association of proton-pump inhibitors with decreased upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Proton-pump inhibitors may have little or no effect on mortality, although a decrease in mortality in less severely ill patients and an increase in mortality in more severely ill patients remain possible. (PROSPERO number CRD42023461695.).
Pharmacological interventions for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients: a mixed treatment comparison network meta-analysis and a recursive cumulative meta-analysis

Kannan Sridharan,Gowri Sivaramakrishnan,Jerome Gnanaraj

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14656566.2017.1419187

Abstract:Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPI), histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RA), sucralfate and antacids are the commonly administered agents for stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in critically ill patients. The authors of this paper have conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of these agents in SUP. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and conference abstracts for studies comparing a SUP agent in critically ill patients to another active SUP agent or placebo. Overt, occult and clinically significant upper gastro-intestinal (UGI) bleeding, all-cause mortality, pneumonia, gastric colonization and ICU length of stay were considered as the outcome measures. A random effects model was used to generate pooled estimates. Results: A total of 53 studies (4258 participants) were included. The pooled estimates were in favor of PPI and sucralfate for the overt UGI bleeding. PPI and H2RA bolus were associated with increased risk of gastric colonization and pneumonia. Conclusions: SUP in critically ill patients was not associated with any benefit with regard to clinically significant bleeding episodes. However, PPI and sucralfate significantly reduces overt UGI bleeding. On the contrary, PPI and H2RA bolus are associated with an increased risk of gastric colonization and pneumonia.
Outcomes of Prophylactic Pantoprazole in Adult Intensive Care Unit Patients Receiving Dialysis: Results of a Randomized Trial

Joerg C Schefold,Mette Krag,Søren Marker,Anders Perner,Jørn Wetterslev,Matt P Wise,Mark Borthwick,Stepani Bendel,Frederik Keus,Anne Berit Guttormsen,Theis Lange,Morten Hylander Møller,the SUP-ICU investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000502732

Abstract:Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients with acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) are considered at high risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is often prescribed. We aimed to assess the incidence of GI bleeding and effects of SUP in these patients. Methods: We assessed GI bleeding in ICU patients receiving RRT at baseline (and at any time in the ICU) and effects of prophylactic pantoprazole versus placebo in the international SUP in the ICU (SUP-ICU) trial. All analyses were conducted according to a published protocol and statistical analysis plan. Results: Data of 3,291 acutely admitted adult ICU patients with one or more risk factors for GI bleeding randomized to pantoprazole or placebo intravenously once daily during ICU stay (until ICU discharge, death, or a maximum of 90 days) were analyzed. Some 20 out of 258 (7.8%, 95% CI 4.5-11.1%) and 52 out of 568 (9.2%, 95% CI 6.8-11.6%) of the patients receiving RRT at baseline and at any time in ICU, respectively, developed clinically important GI bleeding in the ICU. We did not observe statistically significant differences in the intervention effect (pantoprazole vs. placebo) in the proportion of patients with clinically important GI bleeding, clinically important events, infectious adverse events, use of interventions to stop GI bleeding, or 90-day mortality in patients with versus without RRT at baseline. Conclusions: In adult ICU patients receiving RRT at baseline, we observed high incidences of clinically important GI bleeding, but did not observe effects of pantoprazole versus placebo in this subgroup.
Effects of Gastric Acid Secretion Inhibitors for Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Fang Li,Hui Liu,Luming Zhang,Xiaxuan Huang,Yu Liu,Boen Li,Chao Xu,Jun Lyu,Haiyan Yin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.898422

IF: 5.6

2022-05-06

Frontiers in Pharmacology

Abstract:Objective: This study analyzed the association of gastric acid secretion inhibitors (GASIs) [including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs)] with the occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and in-hospital mortality in patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Method: Patients who received IMV and used GASI were included based on records in the MIMIC-IV database. The relationships of GASIs with VAP and the in-hospital mortality were determined using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Also, the effects of GASIs in some subgroups of the population were further analyzed. Results: A total of 18,669 patients were enrolled, including 9191 patients on H2RAs only, 6921 patients on PPIs only, and 2557 were on a combination of the two drugs. Applying logistic regression to the univariate and multivariate models revealed that compared with H2RAs, PPIs had no significant effect on the incidence of VAP, and the combination of H2RAs and PPIs was a risk factor for VAP. Compared with H2RAs, univariate logistic regression revealed that, PPIs and combine the two drugs were both risk factors for in-hospital mortality, but multivariate logistic regression showed that they were not significantly associated with in-hospital mortality. In subgroup analysis, there were interaction in different subgroups of age, PCO2, myocardial infarct, congestive heart failure (P for interaction<0.05). Conclusion: Compared with H2RAs, PPIs did not have a significant association with either VAP or in-hospital mortality; the combination of H2RAs and PPIs was risk factor for VAP, but did not have a significantly associated with in-hospital mortality.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

Ying Wang,Long Ge,Zhikang Ye,Reed A. Siemieniuk,Annika Reintam Blaser,Xin Wang,Anders Perner,Morten H. Møller,Waleed Alhazzani,Deborah Cook,Gordon H. Guyatt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06209-w

IF: 38.9

2020-08-24

Intensive Care Medicine

Abstract:Motivated by a new randomized trial (the PEPTIC trial) that raised the issue of an increase in mortality with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) relative to histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), we updated our prior systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) addressing the impact of pharmacological gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients.

critical care medicine
Lower Risk of Upper GI Bleeding with Pantoprazole in Adults Receiving Mechanical Ventilation

Karen Rosenberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0001050840.25519.46

2024-09-01

Abstract:According to this study.
Impact of short-term proton pump inhibitors vs. histamine-2 receptor antagonists on gut microbiota in patients with acute coronary syndrome: A multicenter randomized trial

Chen Chen,Huizhu Liang,Meibo He,Ruqiao Duan,Yu Guan,Fangfang Wang,Liping Duan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000003148

2024-09-23

Abstract:Background: Several randomized controlled studies have suggested that the prophylactic use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients could not reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and may increase adverse events such as intestinal infection and pneumonia. Gut microbiota may play a critical role in the process. PPIs has been widely prescribed for GIB prophylaxis in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This study aimed to determine the short-term effects of PPI and histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) treatment on gut microbiota of ACS patients. Methods: The study was designed as a single-blind, multicenter, three-parallel-arm, randomized controlled trial conducted at three centers in Beijing, China. We enrolled ACS patients at low-to-medium risk of GIB and randomized (2:2:1) them to either PPI (n = 40), H2RA (n = 31), or control group (n = 21). The primary outcomes were the alterations in gut microbiota after 7 days of acid suppressant therapy. Stool samples were collected at baseline and 7 days and analyzed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Results: There were no significant changes in the diversity of gut microbiota after the short-term use of acid suppressants, but the abundance of Fusobacterium significantly increased and that of Bifidobacterium significantly decreased, especially in PPI users. In addition, the abundance of some pathogenic bacteria, including Enterococcus and Desulfovibrio, was significantly elevated in the PPI users. The fecal microbiota of the PPI users included more arachidonic acid metabolism than that of control group. Conclusions: PPIs may increase the risk of infection by adversely altering gut microbiota and elevating arachidonic acid metabolism, which may produce multiple proinflammatory mediators. For ACS patients at low-to-medium risk of GIB, sufficient caution should be paid when acid-suppressant drugs are prescribed, especially PPIs. Registration: www.chictr.org.cn/ (ChiCTR2000029552).
The Association of Long-Term Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonists with Clinical Complications in Patients with Severe Sepsis

Jiamin Gao,Senlin Ma,Siyuan Xu,Mingquan Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4093595

2022-06-28

Disease Markers

Abstract:Objective. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly used to treat gastric acidity, and their frequent use may trigger various malfunctioning, such as cardiac, renal, and liver function failure. In the current study, we evaluated the association between the excessive use of the PPIs and the clinical complications of intensive care unit (ICU) septic patients. Methods. A total of 208188 patients were analyzed from 2016 to 2017 through the China Critical Care Sepsis Trial (CCCST) database. The characteristics of the study group and outcome of events from the PPI- and H2 blocker-using groups were reported. To get unbiased results, the data from the target trials were randomly assigned for PPI and H2 blocker groups. Result. The data revealed 43.34 excess deaths (95% confidence intensive (CI) 25.12 to 62.02) per 1000 patients in patients extensively consuming PPI drugs. The sepsis with chronic kidney disease attributed to deaths 21.36; 95% CI (9.34 to 23.23). However, comorbidities, including circulatory diseases (16.34; 95% CI 5.78 to 23.45), nervous system (2.08; 95% CI 1.56 to 6.34), mental disorders (1.87; 95% CI 1.65 to 2.95), genitourinary system (5.23; 95% CI 3.69 to 8.89), and infectious and parasitic disease (4.17; 95% CI 1.44 to 7.49), were also reported. Extensive use of the PPIs and H2 blockers was associated with esophageal adenocarcinoma, Barrett’s esophagus, neoplasms, and GI cancers. Conclusion. We conclude that the excessive use of PPI in sepsis patients triggers chronic kidney disease which has a higher clinical complication rate among others.

genetics & heredity,pathology,medicine, research & experimental,biotechnology & applied microbiology
Association between reduced risk of gastrointestinal bleeding related to proton pump inhibitor use and subsequent all-cause death in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention

M Ishii,T Nakamura,K Tsujita,H Fujita,T Matoba,T Kohro,T Kabutoya,K Kario,A Kiyosue,Y Mizuno,M Nakayama,Y Miyamoto,H Sato,R Nagai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.1306

IF: 39.3

2024-10-30

European Heart Journal

Abstract:Background Gastrointestinal bleeding is the leading cause of post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) bleeding complications which are associated with a high risk for subsequent clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to estimate association between risk of gastrointestinal bleeding events related to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and subsequent clinical outcomes in patients with PCI. Methods The Clinical Deep Data Accumulation System (CLIDAS) is a database for inclusive of patient characteristics, medications, laboratory test, physiological test, cardiac catheterization and PCI treatment, all of which were aggregated from electronic medical records in 7 tertiary hospitals in Japan. Data of 6457 patients who underwent PCI between April 2014 and March 2020 and were then followed for 30 days after the index PCI, were analyzed. These patients were divided into two groups based on use of PPI; the PPI group (n=5285; 82%) and the non-PPI group (n=1172; 18%). Clinical outcomes, defined as gastrointestinal bleeding and all-cause death, were assessed using propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) models. Results Among the 6457 PCI patients, 90 (1.7%) in the PPI group and 31 (2.6%) in the non-PPI group experienced gastrointestinal bleeding events. Adjusting for baseline demographics, comorbidities, and anti-thrombotic treatments, the multivariable Cox hazard model suggested a trend towards a lower risk of gastrointestinal bleeding with PPI use (HR, 0.70; 95%CI, 0.46-1.05; p=0.087). The PSM analysis confirmed a significant association between PPI use and a lower risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (HR, 0.13; 95%CI, 0.04-0.43; p=0.001), consistent with IPTW model results (HR, 0.60; 95%CI, 0.38-0.95; p=0.031). Subgroup analysis showed that PPI use was associated with a low risk of all-cause death in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (HR, 0.58; 95%CI, 0.36-0.93; p=0.024). Causal mediation analysis indicated an indirect effect of PPI on reducing all-cause death through the suppression of gastrointestinal bleeding events. Conclusion These findings suggested that use of PPI against gastrointestinal bleeding complications might reduce the risk of subsequent all-cause death in ACS patients undergoing PCI.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Are Proton Pump Inhibitors More Effective Than Histamine-2-Receptor Antagonists for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies.

Na He,Yingying Yan,Shan Su,Qinggang Ge,Suodi Zhai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10600280211059040

2021-01-01

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) have been largely replaced by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) despite the inconclusive evidence concerning comparative effectiveness.OBJECTIVE:To compare the effectiveness of PPIs and H2RAs on SUP in real-world setting.METHODS:PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to September 19, 2021. We included cohort studies comparing PPIs with H2RAs in critically ill adult patients and explicitly reporting the outcome of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding or mortality. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess potential risk of bias. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis and only the studies with adjusted effect estimates were pooled. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to assess the overall quality of the evidence.RESULTS:Thirteen cohort studies (N = 145 149) were eligible and 11 of them available for full texts were of low to moderate risk of bias. Meta-analysis of adjusted effect estimates indicated that PPIs were associated with a significantly higher risk of GI bleeding, compared with H2RAs (8 studies, odds ratio [OR] = 1.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30-3.01, low certainty). Post hoc pooling analysis also suggested that PPIs were associated with a slightly higher risk of mortality in comparison with H2RAs (7 studies, OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.13-1.42, low certainty).CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE:The systematic review of cohort studies showed that PPIs were associated with higher risks of GI bleeding and mortality, although the certainty of evidence was low. Overall, we suggest not excluding H2RAs for SUP, while further studies are essential for elucidating the risk stratification, optimal regimen, and specific duration.
Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors on cardiovascular events and inflammatory factors in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding undergoing dual antiplatelet therapy

Shi, Linni

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10787-024-01467-2

2024-04-21

Inflammopharmacology

Abstract:This work evaluated the effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on cardiovascular events (CVEs) and inflammatory factors in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) undergoing dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention. Clinical data from these patients were analysis, intending to provide relevant theoretical evidence for clinical practice.

immunology,toxicology
Stress ulcer prophylaxis in intensive care unit patients receiving enteral nutrition: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Hui-Bin Huang,Wei Jiang,Chun-Yao Wang,Han-Yu Qin,Bin Du

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1937-1

2018-01-28

Abstract:Background: Pharmacologic stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is recommended in critically ill patients with high risk of stress-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. However, as to patients receiving enteral feeding, the preventive effect of SUP is not well-known. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of pharmacologic SUP in enterally fed patients on stress-related GI bleeding and other clinical outcomes. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database from inception through 30 Sep 2017. Eligible trials were RCTs comparing pharmacologic SUP to either placebo or no prophylaxis in enterally fed patients in the ICU. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis and publication bias were explored. Results: Seven studies (n = 889 patients) were included. There was no statistically significant difference in GI bleeding (RR 0.80; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.31, p = 0.37) between groups. This finding was confirmed by further subgroup analyses and sensitivity analysis. In addition, SUP had no effect on overall mortality (RR 1.21; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.56, p = 0.14), Clostridium difficile infection (RR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.25 to 3.19, p = 0.86), length of stay in the ICU (MD 0.04 days; 95% CI, -0.79 to 0.87, p = 0.92), duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -0.38 days; 95% CI, -1.48 to 0.72, p = 0.50), but was associated with an increased risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia (RR 1.53; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.27; p = 0.03). Conclusions: Our results suggested that in patients receiving enteral feeding, pharmacologic SUP is not beneficial and combined interventions may even increase the risk of nosocomial pneumonia.
The Efficacy And Safety Of Acid Suppressants For Gastrointestinal Bleeding Prophylaxis In Cardiac Care Unit Patients

Chen Chen,Hui Liu,Ruqiao Duan,Fangfang Wang,Liping Duan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.15432

2021-01-01

Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Abstract:Background and Aim Concerns regarding adverse events associated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) prophylaxis in the intensive care unit have increased in recent years. Few studies have focused on acid suppressant use in the cardiac care unit (CCU) setting exclusively. We performed a cohort study to determine the efficacy and safety of acid suppressants for GIB prophylaxis in CCU patients.Methods This retrospective cohort study included adults who were admitted directly to the CCU for more than 2 days from January 1, 2014, to April 30, 2019. The Crusade score was calculated to evaluate the risk of GIB. The primary outcomes were clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding (CIGIB), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), and in-hospital mortality.Results Of the 3318 patients enrolled, 2284 (68.8%) patients received PPIs, 515 (15.5%) received H2RAs, and 519 (15.7%) received no acid suppressants. After adjusting for potential confounders, utilization of PPIs (2.69, 95% confidence interval [0.62-11.73]) and H2RAs (1.41, 95% confidence interval [0.19-10.36]) were not associated with a lower risk of CIGIB than the control. Sensitivity analyses revealed that PPI use was an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality in patients over 75 years old, with an adjusted odds ratio of 4.08 (1.14-14.63). PPIs increased the risk of HAP in patients over 75 years old and in those with heart failure, with adjusted odds ratios of 2.38 (1.06-5.34) and 2.88 (1.34-7.28), respectively.Conclusions Proton pump inhibitors and H2RAs for GIB prophylaxis in CCU patients were not associated with a lower risk of CIGIB than the controls. PPI therapy is associated with increased risks of HAP and in-hospital mortality in patients over 75 years old. PPIs may increase the risk of HAP in patients with heart failure.
Meta-analysis of Influences on Intravenous Intermittent Administration and Continuous Infusion of Proton Pump Inhibitors on Prognosis of Patients with Peptic Ulcer Bleeding

Chenxiao Wang,Yinghui Shuai,Ken Chen,Wei Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19960/j.cnki.issn1005-0698.2017.10.004

2017-01-01

Abstract:Objective:To systematically evaluate the influence of intravenous intermittent administration and continuous infusion proton pump inhibitors on the prognosis of patients with peptic ulcer bleeding,in order to provide evidences for the choice of route of administration of proton pump inhibitors in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding.Methods:PubMed,Embase,The Cochrane Library,CNKI,Wanfang Data,SinoMed were searched through January 2017.Randomized controlled trials were screened comparing different intravenous of administration on the effect of proton pump inhibitors on the prognosis of patients with peptic ulcer bleeding.The RevMan 5.3 software was used for Meta analysis.Results:Seventeen RCTs with 3 033 patients were enrolled in this study.The efficacy of continuous infusion and intermittent infusion of proton pump inhibitors on the prognosis of patients with gastrointestinal ulcer bleeding was compared.There was no significant difference in the incidence of rebleeding after 72h,7 days and 30 days between intermittent and continuous infusion groups (RR =0.82,95％ CI:0.62-1.08,P =0.16),there was also no significant difference in surgery (RR =0.99,95％ CI:0.62-1.57,P =0.97) and mortality (RR =0.67,95％ CI:0.31-1.43,P =0.30).Conclusion:Intermittent administration and continuous infusion of proton pump inhibitor therapy could achieve the same effect for patients with gastrointestinal ulcer bleeding.

In patients receiving invasive ventilation, PPIs reduce upper GI bleeding but did not affect mortality at 90 d

Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis during Invasive Mechanical Ventilation

A pragmatic assessment of proton pump inhibitors vs. histamine type 2 receptor antagonists on clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding and mortality when used for stress ulcer prophylaxis in the ICU

Proton pump inhibitors for gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: A systematic review protocol

Proton pump inhibitors in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: protocol for a substudy of the Re-EValuating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) Trial

Association of Proton Pump Inhibitor Prophylaxis on Clinical Outcome in Acute Ischemic Stroke in China: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

[Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitors on In-Stent Restenosis in Patients Receiving Clopidogrel: a Retrospective Analysis].

Proton-Pump Inhibitors to Prevent Gastrointestinal Bleeding - An Updated Meta-Analysis

Pharmacological interventions for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients: a mixed treatment comparison network meta-analysis and a recursive cumulative meta-analysis

Outcomes of Prophylactic Pantoprazole in Adult Intensive Care Unit Patients Receiving Dialysis: Results of a Randomized Trial

Effects of Gastric Acid Secretion Inhibitors for Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

Lower Risk of Upper GI Bleeding with Pantoprazole in Adults Receiving Mechanical Ventilation

Impact of short-term proton pump inhibitors vs. histamine-2 receptor antagonists on gut microbiota in patients with acute coronary syndrome: A multicenter randomized trial

The Association of Long-Term Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonists with Clinical Complications in Patients with Severe Sepsis

Association between reduced risk of gastrointestinal bleeding related to proton pump inhibitor use and subsequent all-cause death in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention

Are Proton Pump Inhibitors More Effective Than Histamine-2-Receptor Antagonists for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies.

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors on cardiovascular events and inflammatory factors in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding undergoing dual antiplatelet therapy

Stress ulcer prophylaxis in intensive care unit patients receiving enteral nutrition: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The Efficacy And Safety Of Acid Suppressants For Gastrointestinal Bleeding Prophylaxis In Cardiac Care Unit Patients

Meta-analysis of Influences on Intravenous Intermittent Administration and Continuous Infusion of Proton Pump Inhibitors on Prognosis of Patients with Peptic Ulcer Bleeding