W1904 Proton Pump Inhibitors Versus Histamine 2 Receptor Antagonists or Sucralfate for Stress Related Mucosal Bleeding Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients: A Follow-Up Meta-Analysis

2008 ◽  
Vol 134 (4) ◽  
pp. A-731
Author(s):  
Co Q. Pham ◽  
Alan Barkun ◽  
Marc Bardou ◽  
Myriam Martel
2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (14) ◽  
pp. 128
Author(s):  
Rano K Sinuraya ◽  
Sharon Gondodiputro ◽  
Henni Djuhaeni

Objective:Stress ulcer prophylaxis is generallyadministered for the prevention stress-related mucosal disease (SRMD) in critically ill patients. Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) are most commonly prescribed in preventing bleeding from SRMD. Pantoprazole iv and omeprazole iv are the most effective, but clinically effective is not always efficient. Thisstudy aimed to investigate whether the most efficient PPIs for prophylaxis in ICU settings.Methods:An observational study was conducted on June 2014 with comparative design by using medical records in January 2012−November 2014 in a private hospital in Bandung City. Both retrospective and prospective data collection was performed in this study. Paired t-test analysis was used to compare average cost of the drugs with significant level p<0.05.Results:The results showed average cost of pantoprazole iv 458.142 IDR/patient and omeprazole iv 575.573 IDR/patient, there were significant differences of average drug cost between pantoprazole iv and omeprazole iv (p=0.0085).Conclusion:Both pantoprazole iv and omeprazole iv were effective but pantoprazole ivhad been found more efficient.


2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Smit S. Deliwala ◽  
Kewan Hamid ◽  
Hemant Goyal ◽  
Anoosha Ponnapalli ◽  
Yazan Zayed ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 106002802110590
Author(s):  
Na He ◽  
Yingying Yan ◽  
Shan Su ◽  
Qinggang Ge ◽  
Suodi Zhai

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document