Literature DB >> 32435091

Know Thy Ulcers!!!

Deepak Govil1, G Praveen Kumar2.   

Abstract

How to cite this article: Govil D, Kumar GP. Know Thy Ulcers!!! Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(3):153-154.
Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32435091      PMCID: PMC7225758          DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23389

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0972-5229


“You don't get ulcers from what you eat. You get them from what's eating you.” The first description of acute gastrointestinal stress ulceration or disruption of mucosa was first published half a century ago.[1] Despite multiple studies, pathogenesis is still not completely understood. Reduced blood flow, ischemia, and reperfusion injury of the mucosa might contribute to the development of stress ulcers.[2] Stress ulcers affects the esophagus, stomach, or duodenum and may be associated with bleeding. Mechanical ventilation, coagulopathy, renal and hepatic failure, major burns, and traumatic brain injury are proven risk factors for stress ulcers and gastrointestinal bleeding. The incidence of clinically significant gastrointestinal bleeding had reduced over the years, and a recent observational study reported an incidence of 2.6%.[3] The decrease in incidence is perceived to be due to improved resuscitation efforts and thereby reducing gastric hypoperfusion, early enteral nutrition, and pharmacological prophylaxis. Pharmacological prophylaxis is been used in majority of critically ill patients despite absence of risk factors, no proven mortality benefit seen, and worse, it is been widely used despite multiple reported side effects with the use of them.[4-6] Increased incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), clostridium difficile diarrhea, myocardial ischemia are few of the complications reported in the literature. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine 2 receptor blockers, and sucralfate are commonly used; PPIs being the most frequently used drugs for prevention of stress ulcers. Proton pump inhibitors have been shown to be superior in reducing the incidence of significant gastrointestinal bleeding but have not been shown to be superior in reducing mortality when compared with other groups of drugs.[7] Albeit stress ulcer prophylaxis is extensively used, guidelines for appropriate use are sparse and outdated,[8] and it is heartening to see a study trying to explore and understand the practices in our country. In an audit on practices of stress ulcer prophylaxis in intensive care unit patients published in this journal by Gupta et al.,[9] 197 physicians with intensive care experience were interviewed with a questionnaire. Nearly two thirds of the respondents felt that stress ulcer prophylaxis should be universal and followed a local institutional-driven protocol. Similar proportion of respondents also believed that significant gastrointestinal bleeding is a common phenomenon and would start prophylaxis either on arrival to hospital or intensive care. Only a third of the respondents believed that bleeding is uncommon, and stress ulcer prophylaxis should be initiated only if risk factors exist. Mechanical ventilation, coagulopathy, use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were predominantly considered as risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, and a minority of respondents (18.3%) also believed that diabetes as an independent major risk factor for bleeding. Large variation in initiation of prophylaxis was noted, with nearly 42.6% started when at least one risk factor is present, but a significant proportion of physicians (43.7%) initiated even without risk factors. Over 90% of respondents believed that initiation of early enteral feeding, within 48 hours of admission, was protective against stress ulcers. No uniformity was found even about timing of initiation of prophylaxis. Timings varied between arrivals to hospital, as soon as mechanical ventilation was started, till up to 7 days post that. More than two thirds of the respondents believed that PPIs were the best drugs for prevention of bleeding and was preferred over histamine 2 receptor blockers and sucralfate. In total, 65% knew that use of PPI was associated with higher incidence of VAP, with 58% of respondents believed that use of PPI was associated with greatest risk of VAP when compared with other drugs and 69.5% knew about the risk of clostridium difficile diarrhea with the use of PPIs. When questioned about the timings of stopping stress ulcer prophylaxis, 43.7% respondents said that they would stop, once the risk factors seized to exist, but the rest said they would continue either through the stay in intensive care (35%) or throughout the stay in the hospital (21.3%). Although a questionnaire-based study, multiple useful findings emerge from the study, regarding understanding and practices of stress ulcer prophylaxis. First and most important of the findings is that significant proportion of respondents believed that gastrointestinal bleeding is common phenomenon, though a recent large randomized control trial showed that the incidence is 4.2% even without stress ulcer prophylaxis and its 2.5% with use of PPIs.[10] Second, PPIs were believed to be better in reducing stress ulcer related bleeding over histamine 2 receptor blockers, which is similar to what has been shown in a recent meta-analysis.[11] Third, PPIs were believed to be associated with higher incidence of VAP and clostridium difficile diarrhea, but a recent meta-analysis on the use of PPIs showed that risk of VAP was similar to PPIs when compared with histamine receptor blockers.[11] The risk of clostridium difficile diarrhea with PPIs or gastric acid suppression by any drug in uncertain and recent large randomized control trial did not show any difference in infectious complications when compared with placebo.[10,11] Fourth, a large variation exists regarding timing of both initiation and termination of use of pharmacological prophylaxis, with a large number of respondents wanted to start without risk factors and continue throughout the stay, despite believing in the adverse effects of the same. Clinical significant gastrointestinal bleeding is an uncommon phenomenon, and use of stress ulcer prophylaxis can reduce this even further. The side efforts believed to be associated have not been proven in large trails. This article brings to foray an important question, about if and when to use stress ulcer prophylaxis. The answer to it is not simple, though one can consider using only when major risk factors exist and stop immediately after they seize to exist. Updated guidelines, taking into account the recent trials in need of the hour, aid the clinicians in appropriate use of the drugs with better understanding and evidence.
  10 in total

1.  ASHP Therapeutic Guidelines on Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis. ASHP Commission on Therapeutics and approved by the ASHP Board of Directors on November 14, 1998.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  1999-02-15       Impact factor: 2.637

2.  Acute gastroduodenal "stress" ulceration: barrier disruption of varied pathogenesis?

Authors:  J J Skillman; W Silen
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1970-09       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Prevalence and outcome of gastrointestinal bleeding and use of acid suppressants in acutely ill adult intensive care patients.

Authors:  Mette Krag; Anders Perner; Jørn Wetterslev; Matt P Wise; Mark Borthwick; Stepani Bendel; Colin McArthur; Deborah Cook; Niklas Nielsen; Paolo Pelosi; Frederik Keus; Anne Berit Guttormsen; Alma D Moller; Morten Hylander Møller
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Proton-pump inhibitors are associated with increased cardiovascular risk independent of clopidogrel use: a nationwide cohort study.

Authors:  Mette Charlot; Ole Ahlehoff; Mette Lykke Norgaard; Casper H Jørgensen; Rikke Sørensen; Steen Z Abildstrøm; Peter Riis Hansen; Jan Kyst Madsen; Lars Køber; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Gunnar Gislason
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-09-21       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 5.  Stress-related mucosal disease in the intensive care unit: an update on prophylaxis.

Authors:  Jefferson M Sesler
Journal:  AACN Adv Crit Care       Date:  2007 Apr-Jun

6.  Pantoprazole in Patients at Risk for Gastrointestinal Bleeding in the ICU.

Authors:  Mette Krag; Søren Marker; Anders Perner; Jørn Wetterslev; Matt P Wise; Joerg C Schefold; Frederik Keus; Anne B Guttormsen; Stepani Bendel; Mark Borthwick; Theis Lange; Bodil S Rasmussen; Martin Siegemund; Helle Bundgaard; Thomas Elkmann; Jacob V Jensen; Rune D Nielsen; Lisbeth Liboriussen; Morten H Bestle; Jeanie M Elkjær; Dorte F Palmqvist; Minna Bäcklund; Jon H Laake; Per M Bådstøløkken; Juha Grönlund; Olena Breum; Akil Walli; Robert Winding; Susanne Iversen; Inge-Lise Jarnvig; Jonathan O White; Björn Brand; Martin B Madsen; Lars Quist; Klaus J Thornberg; Anders Møller; Jørgen Wiis; Anders Granholm; Carl T Anthon; Tine S Meyhoff; Peter B Hjortrup; Søren R Aagaard; Jo B Andreasen; Christina A Sørensen; Pernille Haure; Jacob Hauge; Alexa Hollinger; Jonas Scheuzger; Daniel Tuchscherer; Thierry Vuilliomenet; Jukka Takala; Stephan M Jakob; Marianne L Vang; Kim B Pælestik; Karen L D Andersen; Iwan C C van der Horst; Willem Dieperink; Jesper Fjølner; Cilia K W Kjer; Christine Sølling; Christoffer G Sølling; Johanna Karttunen; Matt P G Morgan; Brit Sjøbø; Janus Engstrøm; Birgit Agerholm-Larsen; Morten H Møller
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 7.  Proton pump inhibitors versus histamine 2 receptor antagonists for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Waleed Alhazzani; Farhan Alenezi; Roman Z Jaeschke; Paul Moayyedi; Deborah J Cook
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Nosocomial pneumonia risk and stress ulcer prophylaxis: a comparison of pantoprazole vs ranitidine in cardiothoracic surgery patients.

Authors:  Todd A Miano; Marc G Reichert; Timothy T Houle; Drew A MacGregor; Edward H Kincaid; David L Bowton
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2009-03-24       Impact factor: 9.410

9.  Opinions and practice of stress ulcer prophylaxis in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units.

Authors:  Glenn M Eastwood; Ed Litton; Rinaldo Bellomo; Michael J Bailey; Mario Festa; Richard W Beasley; Paul J Young
Journal:  Crit Care Resusc       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.159

Review 10.  Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Authors:  Fayez Alshamsi; Emilie Belley-Cote; Deborah Cook; Saleh A Almenawer; Zuhoor Alqahtani; Dan Perri; Lehana Thabane; Awad Al-Omari; Kim Lewis; Gordon Guyatt; Waleed Alhazzani
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 9.097

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.