Safety Of Proton Pump Inhibitors Research Articles

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

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. Data of 166 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and developed UGIB while on DAPT at The First People' Hospital of Linping District from April 2021 to April 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were rolled into two groups: those who received PPI treatment and those who did not, namely, PPI and non-PPI group, respectively. Furthermore, occurrence of CVEs and the levels of inflammatory factors of patients in all groups were statistically analyzed. In patients with UGIB, melena is a common presentation. The incidence of CVE in the PPI group showed no statistically significant difference compared to the control group, and there was no significant variance observed in the distribution of CVE incidence among different PPIs. However, levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) were significantly lower in the PPI group compared to the non-PPI group (P < 0.05). Melena was the most frequent clinical manifestation in UGIB patients. The use of PPIs did not increase the risk of CVEs, and different PPI drugs did not affect the occurrence of CVEs. Furthermore, PPIs lowered CRP and TNF-α levels in serum of these patients.

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

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. 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. 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.

Proton Pump Inhibitors in Pediatric Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

This systematic review was conducted with the objective of understanding the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in the pediatric population. We used PubMed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1 June 2010 and 30 June 2023, performed in patients from birth to 18 years old with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) who received treatment with any PPI. This literature search yielded 76 articles and 13 of these met the inclusion criteria. For infants, PPIs were equal to placebos in reducing GERD symptoms in four articles. In one article, the numbers of GER episodes and esophageal acid exposures were lower in infants who received PPIs in the left lateral position, but there was generally no significant improvement in symptoms. In another publication, the combination of PPIs and feeding modifications (FMs) was not more effective than PPIs alone. For children and adolescents, PPIs were effective in improving symptoms and achieving endoscopic healing, which was subsequently maintained. To conclude, PPIs are not effective in reducing the symptoms related to GERD in infants but are effective in older children, where histological remission can be seen. Generally, PPIs are well tolerated, but it is important to remember the possible adverse events (AEs), especially if PPIs are used for an extended period.

A Meta-analysis of PPIs Plus Alginate Versus PPIs Alone for the Treatment of GERD

To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) combined with alginate versus PPIs alone in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) of PPIs combined with alginate and PPIs alone for the treatment of GERD in PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched and screened, and the risk assessment of bias and statistical analysis were performed using Rev Man 5.4 software. A total of four RCTs (608 patients) were included. Before and after treatment, the change of heartburn score in the experimental group increased compared with the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant [Standard Mean Difference (SMD)=-0.29, 95%CI (-0.78, 0.19), P>0.05]; The change of HRDQ heartburn score increased, but the difference was not statistically significant [SMD=-0.40, 95%CI (-1.04, 0.24), P>0.05]; The number of days without heartburn during the 28-day treatment period increased, but the difference was not statistically significant [OR=1.16, 95%CI (0.37, 3.61), P>0.05]; The amount of reflux score increased, but the difference was not statistically significant [SMD=-0.30, 95%CI (-0.71, 0.11), P>0.05]; The amount of change in HRDQ regurgitation score increased, but the difference was not statistically significant [SMD=-0.05，95%CI （-1.57，0.17），P>0.05]； There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events with treatment [OR=0.93, 95%CI (0.58, 1.47), P>0.05]. In the treatment of GERD, the efficacy of PPIs combined with alginate is improved compared with PPIs alone, but there is no significant difference, and alginate does not increase the occurrence of adverse events in PPIs treatment. In the future, more subdivisions of GERD subtypes and more high-quality studies are needed to further improve the treatment strategy of GERD-related diseases.

Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review.

Objective. Commonly recommended drugs for adults and children include proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), proven effective for treating peptic diseases like stomach ulcers, GERD, and Helicobacter pylori infections in children over 1-year-old. Yet, prolonged PPI use carries higher risks of adverse reactions, prompting this study's analysis. Methods. We have performed a systematic review of 30 articles, which include a total of 762 505 pediatric patients. Results. Adverse effects were encountered in 6.98% of the population. The 5 most common adverse effects were respiratory tract complications, gastrointestinal complications, urinary tract infections, asthma, and ENT infections. Conclusion. Hence, PPIs should be prescribed only when necessary, and physicians should prioritize patient education when considering their use.

BRAZILIAN CLINICAL GUIDELINE FOR THE THERAPEUTIC MANAGEMENT OF GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE (BRAZILIAN FEDERATION OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, FBG).

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) is a prevalent condition in Brazil, affecting 12% to 20% of the urban population, with significant implications for patient quality of life and potential for complications. This paper focuses on the recent update of the Brazilian guidelines for GERD, a necessary revision due to advancements in knowledge and practice since the last publication over a decade ago. The update pays particular attention to the role and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), acknowledging the growing concerns about their long-term use, adverse events, and overprescription. The methodology of the guideline update involved an extensive literature review in multiple languages (English, French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese), drawing from major databases such as Medline, Embase, and SciELO-Lilacs. This comprehensive approach resulted in a carefully curated selection of studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, specifically focusing on PPIs and other therapeutic strategies for GERD. The updated guidelines are presented in a user-friendly question-and-answer format, adhering to the PICO system (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) for clarity and ease of interpretation. The recommendations are supported by robust scientific evidence and expert opinions, enhancing their practical applicability in clinical settings. To ensure the reliability and clarity of the recommendations, the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) was employed. This system categorizes the strength of recommendations as strong, weak, or conditional and classifies evidence quality as high, moderate, low, or very low. These classifications provide insight into the confidence level of each recommendation and the likelihood of future research impacting these guidelines. The primary aim of these updated guidelines is to offer practical, evidence-based advice for the management of GERD in Brazil, ensuring that healthcare professionals are equipped with the latest knowledge and tools to deliver optimal patient care. •Gastrointestinal specialists rely heavily on guidelines to manage digestive pathologies effectively. The Brazilian clinical guideline for therapeutic management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is an invaluable tool for these specialists. •It critically analyzes practical aspects of therapy through 12 questions covering a wide range of topics, from behavioral measures to surgical and endoscopic indications. •The recommendations in this guideline are justified using the GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation), and experienced experts provide comments and suggestions at the end of each question.

The Efficacy and Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors Combining Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients with Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The Efficacy and Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors Combining Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients with Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors and H2 receptor antagonists in the initial non‑eradication treatment of duodenal ulcer: A network meta‑analysis.

The present network meta-analysis aimed to enhance the corresponding evidence with respect to the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals treatments. Frequentist network meta-analysis was used. Medical literature up to November 2022 was searched for randomized clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of these pharmaceuticals, either compared with each other or compared with placebo. With the exception of ranitidine (300 mg four times daily) and vonoprazan (20 mg once daily) having lower safety than placebo, the efficacy and safety of the remaining treatments were superior to placebo. Cimetidine (400 mg four times daily) and pantoprazole (40 mg once daily) were ranked first in terms of efficacy. The frequentist network meta-analysis shows that for cimetidine (except 400 mg once daily), famotidine, rabeprazole, ilaprazole, lansoprazole (except 7.5 mg once daily) and omeprazole (except 10 mg once daily or 30 mg once daily), the efficacy comparison between the different doses of each of the aforementioned pharmaceuticals did not indicate statistically significant differences. In conclusion, pantoprazole (40 mg once daily) was the best choice for the initial non-eradication treatment of patients with duodenal ulcer, and cimetidine (400 mg twice daily), omeprazole (20 mg once daily), lansoprazole (15 mg once daily), ilaprazole (5 mg once daily) and rabeprazole (10 mg once daily) could be used as the first choice. If the aforementioned pharmaceuticals cannot be prescribed, famotidine (40 mg twice daily) is recommended.

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors versus vonoprazan in treatment of erosive esophagitis: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and vonoprazan are recommended as first-line therapies for erosive esophagitis (EE). However, it is uncertain how the magnitude of efficacy and safety of first-line therapy, the choice of individual PPIs or vonoprazan in the treatment of EE remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan and PPIs in healing esophageal mucosal injury in patients with EE. Relevant databases were searched to collect randomized controlled trials of proton pump inhibitors and vonoprazan in the treatment of reflux esophagitis up to December 2021. Studies on standard-dose PPIs or vonoprazan that were published in Chinese or English and assessed healing effects in EE were included in the analysis. Stata16.0 was used to conduct a network Meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the treatment. A total of 41 literatures were included with 11,592 enrolled patients. For the endoscopic cure rate, all the PPIs and vonoprazan significantly improve compared to Placebo; Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, Ilaprazole ranked first, followed by esomeprazole, vonoprazan, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, rabeprazole and placebo therapy ranked the last. For the rate of adverse events, there was no significant difference among all the PPIs, vonoprazan, and placebo. Ilaprazole, esomeprazole and vonoprazan have more advantages in mucosal erosion healing, there was no significant difference in the comparative safety among all interventions.

Effectiveness of Proton Pump Inhibitors as a Gastrointestinal Bleeding Prophylaxis in Intensive Care Unit: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: GI bleeding is a serious illness that can lengthen the time spent in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and increase morbidity and death by up to four times. Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) are agents commonly used in patients to prevent Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in ICU. However, nowadays, the use of PPIs to prevent GI bleeding is being concerned due to the emergence of various studies regarding the side effects caused by PPIs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to see the magnitude of the effectiveness and validate the safety of PPIs.&#x0D; Methods: We searched through PubMed, ScienceDirect, GARUDA Portal, Clinical Key, and Google Scholar databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of PPI administration on the PPI and placebo groups in adults ICU patients.&#x0D; Results: From a total of 8 studies, this meta-analysis shows the effectiveness of PPIs as prophylactic GI bleeding significantly with p &lt; 0.0001, RR = 0.52 (95% CI 0.38-0.71). Regarding safety, PPIs did not significantly increase the risk of pneumonia (p = 0.30, RR = 1.31 (95% CI 0.78-2.20)); and C. difficile infection (p = 0.90, RR = 0.91 (95% CI 0.21-3.85); and it does not impact on the mortality event (p = 0.78; RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.93-1.10).&#x0D; Conclusions: PPIs reduce GI bleeding in ICU patients over the age of 18. PPIs are also safe to use as preventative GI bleeding with no increased risk of pneumonia and C. difficile infection. PPI does not, however, significantly affect the death rates.

Comparison of acid-lowering drugs for endoscopy negative reflux disease: Systematic review and network Meta-Analysis.

The comparative efficacy and safety of medical therapies for gastro-esophageal reflux symptoms in endoscopy-negative reflux disease is unclear. We conducted a network meta-analysis to evaluate efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine-2-receptor antagonists, potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs), and alginates in patients with endoscopy-negative reflux disease. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMBASE Classic, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials from inception to February 1, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy of all drugs versus each other, or versus a placebo, in adults with endoscopy-negative reflux disease. Results were reported as pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals to summarize effect of each comparison tested, with treatments ranked according to P-score. We identified 23 RCTs containing 10,735 subjects with endoscopy-negative reflux disease. Based on failure to achieve complete relief of symptoms between ≥2 and <4 weeks, omeprazole 20 mg o.d. (P-score 0.94) ranked first, with esomeprazole 20 mg o.d. or 40 mg o.d. ranked second and third. In achieving adequate relief, only rabeprazole 10mg o.d. was significantly more efficacious than placebo. For failure to achieve complete relief at ≥4 weeks, dexlansoprazole 30 mg o.d. (P-score 0.95) ranked first, with 30 ml alginate q.i.d. combined with omeprazole 20 mg o.d., and 30 ml alginate t.i.d. second and third. In terms of failure to achieve adequate relief at ≥4 weeks, dexlansoprazole 60 mg o.d. ranked first (P-score 0.90), with dexlansoprazole 30 mg o.d. and rabeprazole 20 mg o.d. second and third. All drugs were safe and well-tolerated. Our results confirm superiority of PPIs compared with most other drugs in treating endoscopy-negative reflux disease. Future RCTs should aim to better classify patients with endoscopy-negative reflux disease, and to establish the role of alginates and PCABs in achieving symptom relief in both the short- and long-term.

PPI efficacy in the reduction of variceal bleeding incidence and mortality, a meta-analysis

ObjectiveTo review the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in gastroesophageal varices (GEVs).MethodsWe searched PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies that measured the effect of PPI for prophylaxis and treatment of post-band ligation ulcers up to July 20, 2021. We included studies that measured the effect of PPI as treatment or prophylaxis for post-band ligation ulcers; articles that were published in peer-reviewed international journals and had enough data for qualitative and quantitative analysis were included with no language restriction. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the inconsistency (I2) and chi-squared (χ2) test. I2 > 50% was considered substantial heterogeneity in the studies, and a P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The data was continuous, and we used the standardized mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval to assess the estimated effect measure.ResultsA total of 7 studies with 2030 patients were included in our study of which 1480 participants were males (72%) and 550 females (18%). Mean age was 59.7 years old. Rebleeding post-band ligation was compared between PPI and placebo with significant favor for PPI (p = 0.00001). The pooled risk ratio was 0.53 (95% CI of 0.41, 0.68); furthermore, bleeding-related death at a 1-month period was compared between PPI and placebo with significant favor for PPI (p = 0.00001). The pooled risk ratio was significant at 0.33 (95% CI of 0.20, 0.53). The length of hospital stay postoperative was compared between PPI and placebo with cumulative mean difference of 0.13 (95% CI of −1.13, 1.39), yet without significance.ConclusionsThe study suggests a twofold reduction in the risk of bleeding and a threefold reduction in the risk of bleeding-related death with the use of PPI following EVL.

Proton Pump Inhibitors in the COVID-19 Pandemic

The safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) use in coronavirus infection (COVID-19) is not well understood. PPIs are potent suppressors of gastric secretion and become one of the ten most widely used drugs in the world. They are expected to influence virus susceptibility, severity, and outcomes in patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This concern is based on their mechanism of action — suppression of gastric acidity, which is considered the first line of defense against infections. Taken together, the results of most studies and meta-analyses support that PPIs use has been associated with increased risk of COVID-19 and severe outcomes. However, taking into account all potential risk factors for disease severity seems impossible in the real world in the context of COVID-19, so conclusions about causal relationships between PPI use and COVID-19 should be treated with great caution. An additional interesting point about the use of PPIs in the pandemic is that it reduced absorption of certain vitamins. On the other hand, several studies have appeared in the literature regarding the protective therapeutic effects of PPIs. There is growing evidence of an immunomodulatory and antifibrotic role of PPIs that could be used in the treatment of COVID-19. In addition, their ability to alkalize the contents of endosomes and lysosomes serves as an obstacle to the penetration of the virus into host cells. This review analyzes the possible effects of PPIs in patients with COVID-19.

Efficacy and Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Patients With Coronary Artery Diseases Receiving Oral Antiplatelet Agents and/or Anticoagulants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) plus antithrombotic strategy in patients with coronary artery diseases compared with antithrombotic strategy alone. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Chinese Biomedical Medical Literature databases to retrieve randomized controlled trials investigating PPIs combined with antithrombotic strategy in coronary artery diseases. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). The primary safety outcome was gastrointestinal events. Secondary outcomes included all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, significant bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions, and gastroduodenal ulcer. Overall, 43,943 patients were enrolled from 19 trials. The incidence of MACCE [relative risk (RR) 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96-1.15], all-cause death (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.69-1.01), cardiovascular death (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.69-1.12), myocardial infarction (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.88-1.09), stent thrombosis (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.76-1.34), and gastroduodenal ulcer (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.13-1.29) did not increase significantly in patients receiving PPIs compared with patients without those. There were significant differences in the risk of gastrointestinal events (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.21-0.54) and significant bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions (RR 0.09; 95% CI 0.03-0.28) between the 2 groups. In patients with coronary artery diseases, PPIs plus antithrombotic strategy could reduce the risk of gastrointestinal events and significant bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions but may not affect the incidence of MACCE, all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and gastroduodenal ulcer (PROSPERO: CRD42021277899, date of registration October 10, 2021).

Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitors Intake During Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer: a Retrospective Cohort Study.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most widely used drugs worldwide and are involved in several drug interactions. Recently, several studies have suggested that PPIs may interfere with the efficacy of capecitabine. This study primarily aimed to investigate the effects of PPI intake on the pathologic response rate of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with capecitabine. A retrospective study was conducted at a French Comprehensive Cancer Center. Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery were included in the study. Demographic parameters, treatment characteristics, survival data, and PPI intake data were collected. Frequencies and percentages were reported for categorical variables and medians and interquartile ranges for continuous variables. Distribution of variables was compared according to PPI treatment using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test for categorical data and nonparametric Wilcoxon tests for continuous variables. Survival data were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. In total, 215 patients were included, of whom 135 (62.8%) were men. The PPI intake frequency was 16.1%. The rate of complete pathological response was not significantly lower in patients on PPIs than in those not on PPIs (8.7% vs. 19%, p = 0.36). PPI intake was not associated with a statistically significant decrease in recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-2.60, p = 0.54) or overall survival (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.33-2.76, p = 0.93). No significant association was observed between PPI co-medication and complete pathological response or survival in patients treated for locally advanced rectal cancer. However, the safety of PPIs could not be confirmed. Further ancillary studies of prospective clinical trials or studies using the Health Data Hub are necessary to explore the effects of PPIs on rectal cancer more accurately.

Updated GERD guideline focuses on PPI safety

Appropriate use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and a review of lifestyle modifications are key topics included in the updated guideline from the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This guideline, which was released online in November 2021 and published in the January 2022 issue of The American Journal of Gastroenterology, updates recommendations from almost a decade ago.

Proton Pump Inhibitors Ameliorate Capecitabine-induced Hand-Foot Syndrome in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is the most common adverse event associated with capecitabine, and its pathogenesis is known to be associated with inflammation. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reportedly exert anti-inflammatory effects; however, the impact of PPIs on capecitabine-induced HFS needs to be clarified in the clinical setting. In the present study, we retrospectively investigated the efficacy and safety of PPIs in patients with breast cancer receiving capecitabine. We analyzed the effects of PPIs on the development of severe HFS (grade ≥2), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in 195 patients who received capecitabine chemotherapy for breast cancer. In total, 50 patients (26%) were treated with PPIs, while 145 patients (74%) did not receive PPIs. The incidence of severe HFS was significantly lower in patients who received PPIs (18%) than in patients who did not receive PPIs (43%, p=0.001), and the discontinuation rate of capecitabine therapy due to HFS was also lower in patients receiving PPIs than in those who did not receive PPIs (p=0.003). Multivariate analysis revealed that concomitant PPIs use was an independent factor that significantly contributed to the prevention of severe HFS (odds ratio (OR)=0.265, p=0.003). Meanwhile, no significant difference in median PFS and OS values was observed between patients treated with and without PPIs. Concomitant use of PPIs could ameliorate capecitabine-induced HFS in patients with breast cancer.

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors versus histamine-2 receptor blockers in the cardiac surgical population: insights from the PEPTIC trial.

The comparative effectiveness and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) versus histamine-2 receptor blockers for stress ulcer prophylaxis in the cardiac surgical intensive care unit population is uncertain. Although the Proton Pump Inhibitors versus Histamine-2 Receptor Blockers for Ulcer Prophylaxis Therapy in the Intensive Care Unit (PEPTIC) trial reported a higher risk of mortality in the PPI arm with no difference in gastrointestinal bleeding, detailed information on surgical variables and clinically relevant surgical subgroups was not available. The analysis included all Canadian cardiac surgery patients enrolled in the PEPTIC trial. Data were electronically linked using unique patient identifiers to a clinical information system. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, gastrointestinal bleeding, Clostridium difficile infections, ventilator-associated conditions and length of stay. We studied 823 (50.6%) randomized to PPIs and 805 (49.4%) to histamine-2-receptor blockers. In the intention-to-treat analysis, there were no differences in hospital mortality [PPI: 4.3% vs histamine-2 receptor blockers: 4.8%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.70], gastrointestinal bleeding (3.9% vs 4.8%, aOR 1.09, 95% CI 0.66-1.81), C. difficile infections (0.9% vs 0.1%, aOR 0.18, 95% CI 0.02-1.59), ventilator-associated conditions (1.6% vs 1.7%, aOR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-1.00) or median length of stay (9.2 vs 9.8 days, adjusted risk ratio 1.06, 85% CI 0.99-1.13). No significant treatment differences were observed among subgroups of interest or per-protocol populations. In a secondary analysis of cardiac surgery patients enrolled in the PEPTIC trial in Canada, no differences in effectiveness or safety were observed between use of PPIs and histamine-2 receptor blockers for stress ulcer prophylaxis. anzctr.org.au identifier: ACTRN12616000481471.

A Narrative Review on Efficacy and Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Children.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most prescribed drugs worldwide and include omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole. Their use in pediatrics is approved for children older than 1 year, for the short-term treatment of symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), healing of erosive esophagitis, treatment of peptic ulcer disease, and eradication of Helicobacter pylori. PPIs are also considered the standard of care for pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis. Despite the strict range of indications, the use of this class of molecules has increased in all pediatric age ranges. The long-term gastric acid suppression in children has been linked to increased risks of gastrointestinal and lower respiratory tract infections, bone fractures, and allergy. This study aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the mechanism of actions, use (and misuse) in infants and children, and safety of PPIs.

Evaluate the effectiveness and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in the treatment of upper GIT disorders

Introduction: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are most prescribed medication classes and have similar efficacy between generic and brand names. PPIs are used for treatment upper GIT disorders. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Methods: A cross sectional study conducted randomly on pharmacies, patients and Doctors to collect a data regarding the effectiveness and safely use of PPI through predesigned questionnaire containing information about dosage, types, side effect, effectiveness and safety of PPIs. The collected data was analysis by using Chi-square for determine the significant differences at α &lt; 0.05. Result: The result of present study revealed numbers of points in which the questionnaire were intended for pharmacies, patients and doctors knowledge, effectiveness and safety of PPIs. The data gathered from pharmacy shown PPI dispensed without prescription (P&lt; 0.05) in dose of 20 mg of omeprazole and for treatment of gastritis, stomachache and on medication use (P&lt; 0.05). No side effect or any problem, safe, and effective of PPIs was from patients seeking PPIs to the drug dispensers. Furthermore, questionnaire for patients whom seeking treatment shown some similarity to pharmacies answers, however lack the knowledge about side effect of PPIs, and PPIs withdraw among patients. PPIs was found to be used by patients due to the advices of friends (P&lt; 0.05). The last part in this study was doctors involved in which some common similarity were also identified between doctors, patients and pharmacies responses. Although, Doctors responses were revealed that PPIs should be used by prescription in single dose of common types of PPIs (P&lt; 0.05). Conclusion: Due to the short time use of PPIs have been reported. This study suggested that, even no side effect and highly effective of PPIs reported, the PPIs should be monitoring and use under prescription.