Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30680444›Full record

SynthesisIntensive care medicine2019

Stress ulcer prophylaxis with proton pump inhibitors or histamin-2 receptor antagonists in adult intensive care patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Marija Barbateskovic, Søren Marker, Anders Granholm, Carl Thomas Anthon, Mette Krag, Janus Christian Jakobsen, Anders Perner, Jørn Wetterslev, Morten Hylander Møller

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Intensive care medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guidelines on optimizing the use of proton pump inhibitors: PPI stewardship.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2023
    Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marija BarbateskovicCopenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. marija.barbateskovic@ctu.dk.ORCID 0000-0001-8566-3660
Søren MarkerCentre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anders GranholmDepartment of Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Carl Thomas AnthonDepartment of Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mette KragDepartment of Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Janus Christian JakobsenCopenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anders PernerCentre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jørn WetterslevCopenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Morten Hylander MøllerCentre for Research in Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Copenhagen University Hospital · DK

Funding

Innovationsfonden 4108-00011B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMost intensive care unit (ICU) patients receive stress ulcer prophylaxis. We present updated evidence on the effects of prophylactic proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) versus placebo/no prophylaxis on patient-important outcomes in adult ICU patients.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) of randomised clinical trials assessing the effects of PPI/H2RA versus placebo/no prophylaxis on mortality, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, serious adverse events (SAEs), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), myocardial ischemia, pneumonia, and Clostridium (Cl.) difficile enteritis in ICU patients.

resultsWe identified 42 trials randomising 6899 ICU patients; 3 had overall low risk of bias. We did not find an effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis on mortality [relative risk 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.14; TSA-adjusted CI 0.94-1.14], but the occurrence of any GI bleeding was reduced as compared with placebo/no prophylaxis (0.60, 95% CI 0.47-0.77; TSA-adjusted CI 0.36-1.00). The conventional meta-analysis indicated that clinically important GI bleeding was reduced (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.48-0.81), but the TSA-adjusted CI 0.35-1.13 indicated lack of firm evidence. The effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis on SAEs, HRQoL, pneumonia, myocardial ischemia and Cl. difficile enteritis are uncertain.

conclusionsIn this updated systematic review, we were able to refute a relative change of 20% of mortality. The occurrence of GI bleeding was reduced, but we lack firm evidence for a reduction in clinically important GI bleeding. The effects on SAEs, HRQoL, pneumonia, myocardial ischemia and Cl. difficile enteritis remain inconclusive.

Indexed as

Histamine H2 AntagonistsHumansIntensive Care UnitsPre-Exposure ProphylaxisProton Pump InhibitorsStomach UlcerStress, PsychologicalHistamine H2 AntagonistsProton Pump InhibitorsCritical careGastrointestinal haemorrhageHistamine-2 receptor antagonistsMeta-analysisPeptic ulcerProton pump inhibitorsStress ulcer prophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID30680444
OpenAlexW2914771545

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.