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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 2020-07, Vol.64 (6), p.714-728 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
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 & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2020 The Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & 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 |