Only full adherence to proton pump inhibitors protects against drug-induced upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Co-prescription of Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy and Proton Pump Inhibitors: Current Guidelines

Dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) prevents thrombotic complications associated with coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndrome, and stent thrombosis following the percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting. When initiating DAPT, the risk of thrombosis must be balanced with the increased risk of upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB). Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are concurrently prescribed with DAPT to reduce bleeding risk. In this review, we discuss the benefits and potential complications of DAPT/PPI co-prescription. The only large international randomized control trial (RCT), Clopidogrel and the Optimization of Gastrointestinal Events Trial (COGENT), shows robust evidence that PPIs are a safe and effective method to reduce the risk of bleeding in patients on DAPT. However, more large-scale RCTs are needed to study potential long-term effects and draw a stronger conclusion on this topic.

Digestive system injury induced by drugs for secondary prevention of ischemic stroke

The recurrence of ischemic stroke can be reduced by active secondary prevention, including antithrombotic, lipid-lowering, antihypertensive, and hypoglycemic treatment. However, long-term use of drugs for secondary prevention can cause damage to the digestive system, reduce patient compliance, increase the recurrence of stroke, and even lead to ulcer bleeding and life-threatening events. It is necessary to early identify populations at a high risk for digestive system injury, understand the adverse reactions of various drugs, and standardize the treatment, which can improve the effect of secondary prevention of ischemic stroke.

NSAID, antiaggregant, and/or anticoagulant-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Is there any change in prophylaxis rate after a 10-year period?

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Using proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) is a protective option for patients who require long-term non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antiaggregants. In our previous study, the rate of PPI use in prophylaxis was found to be 2%. Here we aimed to investigate whether there is a change in PPI use in prophylaxis in a similar patient group after 10 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The patients who followed up with upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding diagnosis between January 01, 2016 and December 31, 2017 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients who had malignancy or variceal hemorrhage were excluded. Ninety-six patients, who had taken NSAIDs, antiaggregants, or anticoagulants that were considered as the possible cause of bleeding, were included in the study. Risk groups for NSAID GI toxicity and PPI use rates in these patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty (21%) of all patients with upper GI bleeding were using PPI. According to the pre-bleeding risk factor assessment, 86% of the patients were found to have moderate to high risk for NSAID-related GI bleeding, and 81% of these patients were not using PPI. PPI prophylaxis was not provided to 15 (75%) of the 20 patients with previous history of peptic ulcer bleeding.

CONCLUSION

Despite many studies and recommendations on risk factors and prophylaxis for NSAID-related bleeding, prophylactic PPI use is still largely ignored by physicians. The rate of PPI use in the patient group of this study was found still quite insufficient.