Prophylactic use of acid suppressants in adult acutely ill hospitalised patients: A systematic review with meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis

Background Acutely ill patients are at risk of stress‐related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and prophylactic acid suppressants are frequently used. In this systematic review, we assessed the effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine‐2 receptor antagon...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2020-07, Vol.64 (6), p.714-728
Hauptverfasser: Marker, Søren, Barbateskovic, Marija, Perner, Anders, Wetterslev, Jørn, Jakobsen, Janus C., Krag, Mette, Granholm, Anders, Anthon, Carl T., Møller, Morten H.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 728
container_issue 6
container_start_page 714
container_title Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
container_volume 64
creator Marker, Søren
Barbateskovic, Marija
Perner, Anders
Wetterslev, Jørn
Jakobsen, Janus C.
Krag, Mette
Granholm, Anders
Anthon, Carl T.
Møller, Morten H.
description Background Acutely ill patients are at risk of stress‐related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and prophylactic acid suppressants are frequently used. In this systematic review, we assessed the effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine‐2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) versus placebo or no prophylaxis in acutely ill hospitalised patients. Methods We conducted the review according to the PRISMA statement, the Cochrane Handbook and GRADE, using conventional meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). The primary outcomes were all‐cause mortality, clinically important GI bleeding and serious adverse events (SAEs). The primary analyses included overall low risk of bias trials. Results We included 65 comparisons from 62 trials (n = 9713); 43 comparisons were from intensive care units. Only three trials (n = 3596) had overall low risk of bias. We did not find an effect on all‐cause mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.14; TSA‐adjusted CI 0.90 to 1.18; high certainty). The rate of clinically important GI bleeding was lower with SUP (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89; TSA‐adjusted CI 0.14 to 2.81; moderate certainty). We did not find a difference in pneumonia rates (moderate certainty). Effects on SAEs, Clostridium difficile enteritis, myocardial ischaemia and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) were inconclusive due to sparse data. Analyses of all trials regardless of risk of bias were consistent with the primary analyses. Conclusions We did not observe a difference in all‐cause mortality or pneumonia with SUP. The incidence of clinically important GI bleeding was reduced with SUP, whereas any effects on SAEs, myocardial ischaemia, Clostridium difficile enteritis and HRQoL were inconclusive. Study registration PROSPERO registration number CRD42017055676; published study protocol: Marker, et al 2017 in Systematic Reviews.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/aas.13568
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2355941921</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2411930384</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3888-2de5522ab26b70f40659af476e505d7eeca32d7bde4470577fc502e33f842c643</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc2KFDEQx4Mo7rh68AUk4EUPvZuPTqfb27D4BQsK6rmpSVczWdIfptIOffMRPPp8PokZZ9eDYC6Von71o-DP2FMpLmR-lwB0IbWp6ntsI3XTFJWx1X22EULIwkirztgjopvc6rJpHrIzrUQlGmE27OfHOM37NYBL3vGFkE89B-c7Tss8RySCMRH3I4duCSmPloRh5T4Evp9o9gmCJ-z4DMljRl_xLaeVEg5wNEb85vHADz7t-YAJfn3_ASOElTxxGDueoofACb8uefn4vZs-Zg96CIRPbus5-_Lm9eerd8X1h7fvr7bXhdN1XReqQ2OUgp2qdlb0pahMA31pKzTCdBbRgVad3XVYllYYa3tnhEKt-7pUrir1OXtx8s5xykdQagdPDkOAEaeFWqWNaUrZKJnR5_-gN9MS872ZKqVstND1UfjyRLk4EUXs2zn6AeLaStEe42pzXO2fuDL77Na47Abs_pJ3-WTg8gQcfMD1_6Z2u_10Uv4GG3KiXg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2411930384</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prophylactic use of acid suppressants in adult acutely ill hospitalised patients: A systematic review with meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Marker, Søren ; Barbateskovic, Marija ; Perner, Anders ; Wetterslev, Jørn ; Jakobsen, Janus C. ; Krag, Mette ; Granholm, Anders ; Anthon, Carl T. ; Møller, Morten H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Marker, Søren ; Barbateskovic, Marija ; Perner, Anders ; Wetterslev, Jørn ; Jakobsen, Janus C. ; Krag, Mette ; Granholm, Anders ; Anthon, Carl T. ; Møller, Morten H.</creatorcontrib><description>Background Acutely ill patients are at risk of stress‐related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and prophylactic acid suppressants are frequently used. In this systematic review, we assessed the effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine‐2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) versus placebo or no prophylaxis in acutely ill hospitalised patients. Methods We conducted the review according to the PRISMA statement, the Cochrane Handbook and GRADE, using conventional meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). The primary outcomes were all‐cause mortality, clinically important GI bleeding and serious adverse events (SAEs). The primary analyses included overall low risk of bias trials. Results We included 65 comparisons from 62 trials (n = 9713); 43 comparisons were from intensive care units. Only three trials (n = 3596) had overall low risk of bias. We did not find an effect on all‐cause mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.14; TSA‐adjusted CI 0.90 to 1.18; high certainty). The rate of clinically important GI bleeding was lower with SUP (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89; TSA‐adjusted CI 0.14 to 2.81; moderate certainty). We did not find a difference in pneumonia rates (moderate certainty). Effects on SAEs, Clostridium difficile enteritis, myocardial ischaemia and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) were inconclusive due to sparse data. Analyses of all trials regardless of risk of bias were consistent with the primary analyses. Conclusions We did not observe a difference in all‐cause mortality or pneumonia with SUP. The incidence of clinically important GI bleeding was reduced with SUP, whereas any effects on SAEs, myocardial ischaemia, Clostridium difficile enteritis and HRQoL were inconclusive. Study registration PROSPERO registration number CRD42017055676; published study protocol: Marker, et al 2017 in Systematic Reviews.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-5172</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1399-6576</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/aas.13568</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32060905</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>acid suppressants ; adverse effects ; Bias ; Bleeding ; Clinical trials ; Clostridium difficile ; Enteritis ; gastrointestinal bleeding ; Health risk assessment ; Histamine ; histamine‐2 receptor antagonists ; Hospitals ; Intensive care units ; Ischemia ; Meta-analysis ; Mortality ; Pneumonia ; Prophylaxis ; Proton pump inhibitors ; Quality of life ; Risk ; Sequential analysis ; stress ulcer prophylaxis ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2020-07, Vol.64 (6), p.714-728</ispartof><rights>2020 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2020 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3888-2de5522ab26b70f40659af476e505d7eeca32d7bde4470577fc502e33f842c643</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3888-2de5522ab26b70f40659af476e505d7eeca32d7bde4470577fc502e33f842c643</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3602-4541 ; 0000-0001-8566-3660 ; 0000-0002-6378-9673 ; 0000-0001-7740-700X ; 0000-0001-5799-7655 ; 0000-0002-4668-0123</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Faas.13568$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Faas.13568$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32060905$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Marker, Søren</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barbateskovic, Marija</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perner, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wetterslev, Jørn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jakobsen, Janus C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krag, Mette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Granholm, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anthon, Carl T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Møller, Morten H.</creatorcontrib><title>Prophylactic use of acid suppressants in adult acutely ill hospitalised patients: A systematic review with meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis</title><title>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</title><addtitle>Acta Anaesthesiol Scand</addtitle><description>Background Acutely ill patients are at risk of stress‐related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and prophylactic acid suppressants are frequently used. In this systematic review, we assessed the effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine‐2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) versus placebo or no prophylaxis in acutely ill hospitalised patients. Methods We conducted the review according to the PRISMA statement, the Cochrane Handbook and GRADE, using conventional meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). The primary outcomes were all‐cause mortality, clinically important GI bleeding and serious adverse events (SAEs). The primary analyses included overall low risk of bias trials. Results We included 65 comparisons from 62 trials (n = 9713); 43 comparisons were from intensive care units. Only three trials (n = 3596) had overall low risk of bias. We did not find an effect on all‐cause mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.14; TSA‐adjusted CI 0.90 to 1.18; high certainty). The rate of clinically important GI bleeding was lower with SUP (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89; TSA‐adjusted CI 0.14 to 2.81; moderate certainty). We did not find a difference in pneumonia rates (moderate certainty). Effects on SAEs, Clostridium difficile enteritis, myocardial ischaemia and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) were inconclusive due to sparse data. Analyses of all trials regardless of risk of bias were consistent with the primary analyses. Conclusions We did not observe a difference in all‐cause mortality or pneumonia with SUP. The incidence of clinically important GI bleeding was reduced with SUP, whereas any effects on SAEs, myocardial ischaemia, Clostridium difficile enteritis and HRQoL were inconclusive. Study registration PROSPERO registration number CRD42017055676; published study protocol: Marker, et al 2017 in Systematic Reviews.</description><subject>acid suppressants</subject><subject>adverse effects</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Bleeding</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Clostridium difficile</subject><subject>Enteritis</subject><subject>gastrointestinal bleeding</subject><subject>Health risk assessment</subject><subject>Histamine</subject><subject>histamine‐2 receptor antagonists</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Intensive care units</subject><subject>Ischemia</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Pneumonia</subject><subject>Prophylaxis</subject><subject>Proton pump inhibitors</subject><subject>Quality of life</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>Sequential analysis</subject><subject>stress ulcer prophylaxis</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>0001-5172</issn><issn>1399-6576</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kc2KFDEQx4Mo7rh68AUk4EUPvZuPTqfb27D4BQsK6rmpSVczWdIfptIOffMRPPp8PokZZ9eDYC6Von71o-DP2FMpLmR-lwB0IbWp6ntsI3XTFJWx1X22EULIwkirztgjopvc6rJpHrIzrUQlGmE27OfHOM37NYBL3vGFkE89B-c7Tss8RySCMRH3I4duCSmPloRh5T4Evp9o9gmCJ-z4DMljRl_xLaeVEg5wNEb85vHADz7t-YAJfn3_ASOElTxxGDueoofACb8uefn4vZs-Zg96CIRPbus5-_Lm9eerd8X1h7fvr7bXhdN1XReqQ2OUgp2qdlb0pahMA31pKzTCdBbRgVad3XVYllYYa3tnhEKt-7pUrir1OXtx8s5xykdQagdPDkOAEaeFWqWNaUrZKJnR5_-gN9MS872ZKqVstND1UfjyRLk4EUXs2zn6AeLaStEe42pzXO2fuDL77Na47Abs_pJ3-WTg8gQcfMD1_6Z2u_10Uv4GG3KiXg</recordid><startdate>202007</startdate><enddate>202007</enddate><creator>Marker, Søren</creator><creator>Barbateskovic, Marija</creator><creator>Perner, Anders</creator><creator>Wetterslev, Jørn</creator><creator>Jakobsen, Janus C.</creator><creator>Krag, Mette</creator><creator>Granholm, Anders</creator><creator>Anthon, Carl T.</creator><creator>Møller, Morten H.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3602-4541</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8566-3660</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6378-9673</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7740-700X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5799-7655</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4668-0123</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202007</creationdate><title>Prophylactic use of acid suppressants in adult acutely ill hospitalised patients: A systematic review with meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis</title><author>Marker, Søren ; Barbateskovic, Marija ; Perner, Anders ; Wetterslev, Jørn ; Jakobsen, Janus C. ; Krag, Mette ; Granholm, Anders ; Anthon, Carl T. ; Møller, Morten H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3888-2de5522ab26b70f40659af476e505d7eeca32d7bde4470577fc502e33f842c643</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>acid suppressants</topic><topic>adverse effects</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Bleeding</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Clostridium difficile</topic><topic>Enteritis</topic><topic>gastrointestinal bleeding</topic><topic>Health risk assessment</topic><topic>Histamine</topic><topic>histamine‐2 receptor antagonists</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Intensive care units</topic><topic>Ischemia</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Pneumonia</topic><topic>Prophylaxis</topic><topic>Proton pump inhibitors</topic><topic>Quality of life</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>Sequential analysis</topic><topic>stress ulcer prophylaxis</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Marker, Søren</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barbateskovic, Marija</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perner, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wetterslev, Jørn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jakobsen, Janus C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krag, Mette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Granholm, Anders</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anthon, Carl T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Møller, Morten H.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Marker, Søren</au><au>Barbateskovic, Marija</au><au>Perner, Anders</au><au>Wetterslev, Jørn</au><au>Jakobsen, Janus C.</au><au>Krag, Mette</au><au>Granholm, Anders</au><au>Anthon, Carl T.</au><au>Møller, Morten H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prophylactic use of acid suppressants in adult acutely ill hospitalised patients: A systematic review with meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis</atitle><jtitle>Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Anaesthesiol Scand</addtitle><date>2020-07</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>64</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>714</spage><epage>728</epage><pages>714-728</pages><issn>0001-5172</issn><eissn>1399-6576</eissn><abstract>Background Acutely ill patients are at risk of stress‐related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and prophylactic acid suppressants are frequently used. In this systematic review, we assessed the effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine‐2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) versus placebo or no prophylaxis in acutely ill hospitalised patients. Methods We conducted the review according to the PRISMA statement, the Cochrane Handbook and GRADE, using conventional meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). The primary outcomes were all‐cause mortality, clinically important GI bleeding and serious adverse events (SAEs). The primary analyses included overall low risk of bias trials. Results We included 65 comparisons from 62 trials (n = 9713); 43 comparisons were from intensive care units. Only three trials (n = 3596) had overall low risk of bias. We did not find an effect on all‐cause mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.14; TSA‐adjusted CI 0.90 to 1.18; high certainty). The rate of clinically important GI bleeding was lower with SUP (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89; TSA‐adjusted CI 0.14 to 2.81; moderate certainty). We did not find a difference in pneumonia rates (moderate certainty). Effects on SAEs, Clostridium difficile enteritis, myocardial ischaemia and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) were inconclusive due to sparse data. Analyses of all trials regardless of risk of bias were consistent with the primary analyses. Conclusions We did not observe a difference in all‐cause mortality or pneumonia with SUP. The incidence of clinically important GI bleeding was reduced with SUP, whereas any effects on SAEs, myocardial ischaemia, Clostridium difficile enteritis and HRQoL were inconclusive. Study registration PROSPERO registration number CRD42017055676; published study protocol: Marker, et al 2017 in Systematic Reviews.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>32060905</pmid><doi>10.1111/aas.13568</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3602-4541</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8566-3660</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6378-9673</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7740-700X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5799-7655</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4668-0123</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0001-5172
ispartof Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2020-07, Vol.64 (6), p.714-728
issn 0001-5172
1399-6576
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2355941921
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects acid suppressants
adverse effects
Bias
Bleeding
Clinical trials
Clostridium difficile
Enteritis
gastrointestinal bleeding
Health risk assessment
Histamine
histamine‐2 receptor antagonists
Hospitals
Intensive care units
Ischemia
Meta-analysis
Mortality
Pneumonia
Prophylaxis
Proton pump inhibitors
Quality of life
Risk
Sequential analysis
stress ulcer prophylaxis
Systematic review
title Prophylactic use of acid suppressants in adult acutely ill hospitalised patients: A systematic review with meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T12%3A36%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prophylactic%20use%20of%20acid%20suppressants%20in%20adult%20acutely%20ill%20hospitalised%20patients:%20A%20systematic%20review%20with%20meta%E2%80%90analysis%20and%20trial%20sequential%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Acta%20anaesthesiologica%20Scandinavica&rft.au=Marker,%20S%C3%B8ren&rft.date=2020-07&rft.volume=64&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=714&rft.epage=728&rft.pages=714-728&rft.issn=0001-5172&rft.eissn=1399-6576&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/aas.13568&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2411930384%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2411930384&rft_id=info:pmid/32060905&rfr_iscdi=true