A Review of Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis

Are Proton Pump Inhibitors More Effective Than Histamine-2-Receptor Antagonists for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies

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.

Pharmacoepidemiology of stress ulcer prophylaxis in the United States and Canada

PURPOSE

This study sought to identify the medication class most commonly prescribed for stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP), assess trends in SUP utilization, and report the use of acid suppressive therapy stratified by bleeding risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter, prospective, point prevalence study reviewed adult patients over a 24-hour period for demographics, medications used for SUP, and risk factors for clinically important bleeding. Stress ulcer prophylaxis was deemed appropriate if acid suppressive therapy was administered to patients at high risk for bleeding or no therapy in patients considered at low bleeding risk. High risk was defined as the presence of mechanical ventilation, coagulopathy, or shock. For patients receiving acid suppression before hospital admission, SUP was considered appropriate if the same drug class was continued regardless of risk factors. A planned subgroup analysis was conducted whereby patients on acid suppressive medications before admission were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 584 patients from 58 intensive care units in 27 hospitals. The most common drug class was proton pump inhibitors (70%). Despite receiving other enteral/oral medications, 36% received intravenous acid suppressive therapy. Overall, SUP was considered appropriate in 78% of patients and 68% when patients on acid suppression before admission were excluded. When stratified by risk, acid suppressive medications were used in 92% of high-risk patients and 71% of low-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

Stress ulcer prophylaxis is frequently administered to patients who are not at high risk for clinically important bleeding. Proton pump inhibitors are the overwhelming first choice among practitioners. Several opportunities exist for improvement regarding the provision of SUP.

Stress-related mucosal bleeding in critically ill oncology patients

Objective. To determine the incidence of stress-related mucosal bleeding (SRMB) in a critically ill oncology population receiving stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with either a histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) or proton pump inhibitor (PPI). Design. Single-center, prospective, observational study.

Setting. Fifty-two bed medical-surgical intensive care unit of an academic oncology institution. Patients. A convenience sample of 100 medical and surgical critically ill oncology patients who received intensive care for more than 24 hours and at least one dose of a H2RA or PPI for prevention of SRMB.

Interventions. None.

Measurements and Main Results. Patients were followed throughout their intensive care unit stay for the development of an overt and/or clinically significant gastrointestinal (GI) bleed. More patients received a PPI (n = 81) in contrast to a H2RA (n = 19) for SUP. Overall, 94 patients (94%) had at least one risk factor for a SRMB with four patients (4%) experiencing an event (overt bleed, n=3; clinically significant bleed, n =1). All cases of GI bleeding occurred in patients receiving a PPI. No ICU deaths were considered directly related to a GI bleed.

Conclusions. The incidence of SRMB among high-risk critically ill oncology patients receiving SUP appears low; further, large-scale trials are needed to confirm this finding. J Oncol Pharm Practice (2009) 15: 9—16.