Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22782130›Full record

ReviewDer Anaesthesist2012

[Stress lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract].

U Jaschinski

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

U JaschinskiKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Klinikum Augsburg, Stenglinstr. 2, 86156, Augsburg, Deutschland. Ulrich.Jaschinski@klinikum-augsburg.de

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinically relevant bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract due to stress lesions is a rare event; however, the related mortality may be as high as 13% (van Leerdam, Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2008; 22:209-224). Most often affected are patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) with impaired perfusion as the protective pathways are critically dependent on a near normal blood flow. Minimal mucosal lesions with a tiny hemorrhage can escalate to severe bleeding as the coagulation potential in the presence of an acidic pH is clearly decreased. Mechanical ventilation and coagulopathy are recognized risk factors and these patients should receive an acid suppressing therapy. Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and histamine type 2 receptor antagonists (H(2)RA) are equal in their ability to prevent stress-related bleeding. However, the side effects of PPI can cause severe morbidity and therefore H(2)RAs may be the drug of choice for prophylaxis. Endoscopy is recommended as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool for patients with active bleeding. Treatment with PPI in this scenario (before and after endoscopy) may reduce complications by leading to premature hemostasis and reduced recurrence of bleeding.

Indexed as

AntacidsDrug InteractionsEnteral NutritionGastrointestinal AgentsGastrointestinal DiseasesHistamine H2 AntagonistsHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationIntestinal MucosaProton Pump InhibitorsRespiration, ArtificialRisk FactorsStress, PhysiologicalStress, PsychologicalSucralfateAntacidsGastrointestinal AgentsHistamine H2 AntagonistsProton Pump InhibitorsSucralfate

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.