DOCSLIB.ORG

Confidential: for Review Only Efficacy and Safety of Gastrointestinal Bleeding Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Confidential: for Review Only Efficacy and Safety of Gastrointestinal Bleeding Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis BMJ Confidential: For Review Only Efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: systematic review and network meta-analysis Journal: BMJ Manuscript ID BMJ-2019-052088 Article Type: Research BMJ Journal: BMJ Date Submitted by the 08-Aug-2019 Author: Complete List of Authors: Wang, Ying; Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Department of Pharmacy YE, ZHIKANG; McMaster University, Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact Ge, Long; School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Evidence Based Social Science Research Center; School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Evidence Based Medicine Center Siemieniuk, Reed; McMaster University, Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact Wang, Xin; Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China Wang, Yingkai; Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China Hou, Liangying; Evidence Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China Ma, Zhuo; Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China Agoritsas, Thomas; McMaster University, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics; University Hospitals of Geneva, Division of General Internal Medicine & Division of Epidemiology Vandvik, Per; Innlandet Hospital Trust-divisjon Gjøvik, Department of Medicine Perner, Anders; Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Dept. of Intensive Care 4131 Møller, Morten; Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Dept. of Intensive Care 4131 Guyatt, Gordon; McMaster University, Liu, Li-Hong; Department of Pharmacy, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Department of Pharmacy gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis, systematic review and network Keywords: meta-analysis, proton pump inhibitors, histamine-2 receptor antagonists, sucralfate https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bmj Page 1 of 109 BMJ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Confidential: For Review Only 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bmj BMJ Page 2 of 109 1 2 3 4 Efficacy and safety of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill 5 6 patients: systematic review and network meta-analysis 7 8 9 1 1,2 3 2,4 1 10 Ying Wang, Zhikang Ye, Long Ge, Reed A Siemieniuk, Xin Wang, Yingkai 11 Wang,1 Liangying Hou,3 Zhuo Ma,1 Thomas Agoritsas,2,5 Per Olav Vandvik,6 Anders 12 Confidential: For Review Only 13 Perner,7 Morten H Møller,7 Gordon H Guyatt,2 Lihong Liu1 14 15 16 17 1Department of Pharmacy, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, 18 19 Beijing, China 20 21 2Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster 22 23 University, Hamilton, Canada 24 25 3Evidence Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou 26 27 University, Lanzhou, China 28 29 4Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada 30 31 5Division General Internal Medicine, and Division of Clinical Epidemiology, 32 33 University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland 34 35 6Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Norway 36 37 7Department of Intensive Care, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, 38 39 Copenhagen, Denmark 40 41 Correspondence to: L Liu [email protected] 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 1 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bmj Page 3 of 109 BMJ 1 2 3 4 ABSTRACT 5 6 OBJECTIVE 7 8 To address the relative impact of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis (often referred 9 10 to as stress ulcer prophylaxis or SUP) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine-2 11 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), sucralfate or no prophylaxis in critically ill patients. 12 Confidential: For Review Only 13 DESIGN 14 15 Systematic review and network meta-analysis. 16 17 DATA SOURCES 18 19 Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, trial 20 21 registers, and grey literature up to March 2019. 22 23 STUDY SELECTION 24 25 Randomised controlled trials comparing gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis with 26 27 PPIs, H2RAs, or sucralfate versus one another or placebo or no prophylaxis in adult 28 29 critically ill patients. 30 31 REVIEW METHODS 32 33 Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and 34 35 assessed risk of bias. A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendation) 36 37 provided critical oversight of the systematic review, including identifying outcomes 38 39 important to patients. We performed random-effects pairwise and network 40 41 meta-analyses (NMA) and used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each 42 43 outcome. When results differed between low and high risk of bias studies we used the 44 45 former as best estimates. 46 47 RESULTS 48 49 Seventy-two trials including 12 660 patients proved eligible. For patients at highest 50 (above 8%) or high (4% to 8%) risk of bleeding, both PPIs (odds ratio 0.61, 95% 51 52 confidence interval 0.42 to 0.89, 3.3% fewer for highest and 2.3% fewer for high risk 53 54 patients, moderate certainty) and H2RAs (OR 0.46, 0.27 to 0.79, 4.6% fewer for 55 56 highest and 3.1% fewer for high risk patients, moderate certainty) probably reduce 57 58 clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding compared with placebo or no 59 60 2 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bmj BMJ Page 4 of 109 1 2 3 4 prophylaxis. PPIs (OR 1.38, 0.97 to 2.08, 4.8% more, low certainty) and H2RAs (OR 5 6 1.26, 0.90 to 1.86, 3.4% more, low certainty) may increase pneumonia compared with 7 8 no prophylaxis. It is likely that neither PPIs nor H2RAs impact on mortality; 9 10 otherwise, results provided no support for any impacting on mortality, Clostroides 11 difficile infection, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, or duration of 12 Confidential: For Review Only 13 mechanical ventilation (varying certainty of evidence). 14 15 CONCLUSIONS 16 17 Evidence failed to support differences in a number of outcomes, including mortality. 18 19 For higher risk critically ill patients, PPIs and H2RAs compared with no prophylaxis 20 21 likely result in important reductions in gastrointestinal bleeding; for patients at low 22 23 risk, the reduction in bleeding may be unimportant. Both PPIs and H2RAs may 24 25 increase pneumonia. 26 27 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION 28 29 PROSPERO CRD42019126656. 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Introduction 59 60 3 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bmj Page 5 of 109 BMJ 1 2 3 4 Critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are at risk for gastrointestinal 5 1 6 bleeding from a number of sources, one of which is stress ulceration. Authorities 7 8 have suggested gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis (often referred to as stress ulcer 9 10 prophylaxis or SUP) as essential to optimize the care of critically ill patients, and most 11 patients considered high-risk receive acid suppression during an ICU stay.2 3 Proton 12 Confidential: For Review Only 13 pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most common prophylactic agent, followed by 14 15 histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs); clinicians seldom use sucralfate and 16 17 antacids.2 4 18 19 Recently, however, the practice has generated controversy.5 Doubts include 20 21 questions of whether bleeding occurs frequently enough, or whether its consequences 22 23 are serious enough, to warrant prophylaxis.5 Moreover, observational studies have 24 25 reported increased rates of nosocomial pneumonia and Clostroides difficile infection 26 27 with the use of acid-suppressive drugs,6 7 raising concern that harms may outweigh the 28 29 benefits. 30 31 Many published systematic reviews and meta-analyses have summarized 32 33 randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence addressing the efficacy and safety of 34 35 interventions for gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis,8-13 including a network 36 37 meta-analysis (NMA) conducted by members of our team.8 Since the publication of 38 39 the last NMA, several trials have been published,14-17 including a large, international, 40 17 41 multicenter RCT (the SUP-ICU trial). This trial compared pantoprazole with 42 43 placebo and concluded that pantoprazole did not reduce mortality or a composite 44 45 secondary outcome of ‘clinically important events’, and questioned the routine use of 46 47 PPIs in critically ill adults. 48 49 We therefore conducted an updated systematic review and NMA addressing the 50 potential benefits and harms of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis with PPIs, 51 52 H2RAs, and sucralfate in critically ill patients. This review is part of the BMJ Rapid 53 54 Recommendations project, a collaborative effort from the MAGIC Evidence 55 56 Ecosystem Foundation (www.magicproject.org) and BMJ. The aim of the project is to 57 58 respond to new potentially practice changing evidence and provide a trustworthy 59 60 4 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/bmj BMJ Page 6 of 109 1 2 3 18 4 practice guideline in a timely manner. In this case, the stimulus was the SUP-ICU 5 17 6 trial. This systematic review informed the parallel guideline published in a 7 8 multilayered electronic format on bmj.com and MAGICapp 9 10 (https://app.magicapp.org/app#/guideline/3096). 11 Methods 12 Confidential: For Review Only 13 Protocol registration 14 15 We registered the protocol for this systematic review with PROSPERO 16 17 (CRD42019126656).19 18 19 Guideline panel and patient involvement 20 21 In accordance with the BMJ Rapid Recommendations process, a guideline panel 22 23 provided critical oversight during the review process, which included identifying 24 25 populations, subgroups, and outcomes of interest.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Critical Care and Resuscitation  Volume 15 Number 2  June 2013 147 BRIEF COMMUNICATION
    BRIEF COMMUNICATION Inappropriate continuation of stress ulcer prophylaxis beyond the intensive care setting KJ Farley, Kerryn L Barned and Tim M Crozier Stress ulceration describes injury of the gastrointestinal (GI) ABSTRACT mucosa in response to stressors such as hypoperfusion, hypoxia, reperfusion, and imbalance between gastric acid Objective: To determine how frequently stress ulcer productionCrit Care and Resusc mucosal ISSN: defence 1441-2772 mechanisms. 13 June 1 Endoscopic prophylaxis (SUP) medications prescribed in the intensive evidence2013 15of 2stress 147-151 ulceration is seen in most patients soon care unit are inappropriately continued on the ward and on ©Crit Care Resusc 20132 afterwww.jficm.anzca.edu. admission to the au/aaccm/journal/publi-intensive care unit, with clinical hospital discharge. severitycations.htm ranging from endoscopic findings only to life- Design: Retrospective cohort study; chart review. Brief communication threatening haemorrhage. Certain subgroups of critically ill Setting: Two Australian ICUs: one tertiary centre and one patients have increased risk of clinically significant GI metropolitan centre. 3,4 bleeding (Table 1), with rates of 3.7% in those with Participants: We included 387 adult, non-pregnant coagulopathy and those needing > 48 hours of mechanical patients who were admitted to the ICU between 1 February ventilation, compared with 0.1% in patients without these 2011 and 31 March 2011 and who survived to hospital 5 risk factors. Clinically significant GI bleeding should be discharge. prevented where possible as it is associated with a signifi- Main outcome measures: Rate of unnecessary cant attributable morbidity, mortality6,7 and increased continuation of ICU-prescribed SUP medications on the length of stay in the ICU.7 ward and on discharge from hospital.
    [Show full text]
  • Updates in Stress-Ulcer Prophylaxis
    Updatesinstressulcerprophylaxis:Is pharmacologicalprophylaxisstill indicated? RubenDVillanueva,PharmD,BCCCP,BCPS Assistantprofessor OUHSCCollegeofPharmacy TraumaCriticalCare OUMedicalCenter 1 Objectives • Describethepathophysiologyofstressulcersinthe criticallyill • Compareandcontrastcurrentstressulcerprophylaxis guidelines • Summarizerecentstressulcerprophylaxisliterature • Determineacriticallyillpatient’scontinuedneedfor stressulcerprophylaxis 2 PreͲAssessment Whichofthefollowingistheunderlying pathophysiologicprocessforthedevelopmentof stressulcersintheICU? A) GIhypoperfusion B) Anemia C) Infection D) Hypersecretorystate 3 PreͲAssessment Whichofthefollowinghavebeenidentifiedas independentriskfactorsforclinicallysignificantGI bleedingincriticallyillpatients? A) Sepsis B) Organtransplant C) Vasoactivemedications D) Renalreplacementtherapy 4 PreͲAssessment Enteralnutritionwouldlikelybesufficientforstress ulcerprophylaxisinwhichofthefollowingscenarios? A) Mechanicallyventilatedpatientreceivingcontinuous renalreplacementtherapywithanINRof2 B) MechanicallyventilatedTBIpatientwithout intracranialhypertension C) Mechanicallyventilatedpatientwithchronicliverand kidneydisease,COPD,andreceivingcorticosteroids D) Mechanicallyventilatedpatientwithoutsignificant PMH,anINRof1.9andonnorepinephrine 5 UpdatesinStressUlcerProphylaxis BACKGROUND& PATHOPHYSIOLOGY 6 Background Stressrelatedmucosaldisease/damage • Representsacontinuum – Asymptomaticsuperficiallesionstoclinically significantGIbleeding(GIB) • Twotypes – Stressrelatedinjury – Stressulcers •
    [Show full text]
  • 1. ICU Protocol Management Cover
    ICU Management Protocols Published by Malaysian Society of Intensive Care Printed by Malaysian Society of Intensive Care (MSIC) Unit 1.6, Level 1, Enterprise 3B Technology Park Malaysia Jalan Innovasi 1, Bukit Jalil 57000 Kuala Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan Website: www.msic.org.my In collabration with Ministry of Health Malaysia Copyright © Malaysian Society of Intensive Care Pusat Kebangsaan ISBN Malaysia ISBN 978-967-11415-4-0 Cover design by Nabil bin Ali Disclaimer: The content of this book has been produced in good faith to guide medical practitioners. However practitioners are advised to keep abreast the current evidence-based practices that are constantly evolving and to take into account the local issues and limitations. Foreword There are many aspects in the care and management of the critically ill patient. As clinicians we need to keep abreast with the most current evidence-based practices to ensure optimal patient care and safety. This is an update of the management protocol book written in 2012, to facilitate clinicians in the management of the critically ill. Each protocol was developed with careful consideration of current evidence as well as the practical application and cost containment within our institutions. The algorithms in the protocols are simple to use and can be easily implemented. There are great concerns on the rise of multi-drug resistant organisms. We know that critically ill patients are at high risk of acquiring infections. To address this, a protocol on prevention and control of multi-drug organisms is included. This protocol materialised due to the many hours of discussion and exchange of opinions.
    [Show full text]
  • In Haemorrhagic Shock Induced Gastric Lesions
    Gut: first published as 10.1136/gut.29.6.826 on 1 June 1988. Downloaded from Gut, 1988, 29, 826-829 Ranitidine and oxygen derived free radical scavengers in haemorrhagic shock induced gastric lesions E C TSIMOYIANNIS, C J SARROS, J C TSIMOYIANNIS, K MOUTESIDOU, G AKALESTOS, AND 0 B KOTOULAS From the Department ofSurgery, G Hatzikosta General Hospital ofIoannina and Department ofAnatomy, loannina University Medical School, loannina, Greece SUMMARY The role of oxygen derived free radicals in gastric lesions induced by haemorrhagic shock and the protective effect of oxygen radical scavengers, allopurinol and ranitidine, were investigated. Forty five rabbits underwent haemorrhagic shock for 30 minutes and reinfusion ofshed blood. They were killed 30 minutes later. The animals were divided in five groups: A (n=10): Control, B (n=10): intravenous ranitidine pretreatment, C (n=10): oral allopurinol, 24 and 2 h before surgery, D (n= 10): intravenous pretreatment with superoxide Dismutase plus catalase, E (n=5): 60 minute haemorrhagic shock without reinfusion and treatment. Erosions and/or petechiae in all animals in Group A were observed. Three animals in group B and C and 2 in group D (p<0O005, p<0-001) had gastric lesions. The lesions in the pretreatment groups were significantly smaller than in controls. Oxygen radicals plus HCI play an important role in shock induced gastric lesions. Oxygen radical antagonists show a significant protective role. http://gut.bmj.com/ Clinical and experimental studies have shown that the role of oxygen derived free radicals in haemorr- haemorrhagic shock often is followed by rapid hagic shock induced gastric lesions and the protective development of gastric mucosal lesions.' 3 Gastric effect of oxygen radical scavengers, allopurinol (a blood flow is considerably reduced during haemorr- xanthine oxidase inhibitor) and ranitidine (an H2 on October 6, 2021 by guest.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (197Kb)
    Idanosa and Kahn Critical Care 2012, 16:305 http://ccforum.com/content/16/1/305 JOURNAL CLUB CRITIQUE Beyond checklists: Using clinician prompts to achieve meaningful ICU quality improvement Osamudiamen Idahosa1 and Jeremy M Kahn*1-3 University of Pittsburgh Department of Critical Care Medicine: Evidence-Based Medicine Journal Club, edited by Sachin Yende Expanded abstract hospital mortality, ICU length of stay and ventilator Citation associated pneumonia. Weiss CH, Moazed F, McEvoy CA, et al. Prompting physicians to address a daily checklist and process of care Results and clinical outcomes: a single-site study. Am J Respir One hundred and forty prompted group patients were Crit Care Med 2011, 184:680-686. Epub 2011 May 26. compared with 125 concurrent control patients and 1283 PubMed PMID: 21616996. pre-intervention patients. Compared with control patients, patients admitted to the service with prompting Background experienced increased ventilator-free days, decreased Checklists may reduce errors of omission for critically ill empirical antibiotic and central venous catheter duration, patients. and increased rates of deep vein thrombosis and stress ulcer prophylaxis. Prompted group patients had lower Methods risk-adjusted ICU mortality compared with the control Objective: To determine whether prompting to use a group (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confi dence interval, 0.13– checklist improves process of care and clinical outcomes. 0.96; P = 0.041) and lower hospital mortality compared Design: Prospective, concurrently-controlled cohort study with the control group (10.0 vs. 20.8%; P = 0.014), which with additional historical controls. remained signifi cant after risk adjustment (adjusted odds Setting: Medical intensive Care Unit (MICU) of a tertiary ratio, 0.34; 95% confi dence interval, 0.15–0.76; P = 0.008).
    [Show full text]
  • Severe Legionnaire's Disease Requiring Intensive Care Treatment
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Erasmus University Digital Repository I‘he Netherlands JOURNALOF MEDICINE ELSEVTER NetherlandsJournal of Medicine 4Y (I 996) I Y6620 I Original article Severe Legionnaire’s disease requiring intensive care treatment I.C. van Riemsdijk-van Overbeeke s’, B. van den Berg ’ Abstract Bwkgwund: Legionnaire’s disease is well known as severe pneumonia requiring intensive care treatment in many cases. In this study the clinical course is described of patients admitted to the medical ICU of the University Hospital of Rotterdam for respiratory distress due to Legionnaire’s disease. Methods: From the register of admissions to the medical ICU all patients suffering from Legionnaire’s disease were identified. All data on clinical signs and symptoms present on admission were collected. The circumstances in which the infections were contracted were sought, as well as the tests establishing the diagnosis. The occurrence of various organ failures and complications were noted, as were the causes of death on the KU. Resdts: From 1978 till 1995 the diagnosis of Legionellu pneumonia was made in I7 patients admitted to the ICU: in I3 patients a community-acquired infection was established. As in I2 patients Legionnaire‘s disease was diagnosed on serological tests, it took several weeks before the diagnosis could be established in these patients. In all patients the circumstances predisposing to Legionnaire’s disease were noted. Respiratory distress was present in all patients, ventilatory support was required in 14. Apart from this, both profound shock and renal failure were commonly encountered. As complications jaundice, rhabdomyolysis and polyneuropathy were frequently noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Guideline for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit
    CLINICAL GUIDELINES DANISH MEDICAL JOURNAL Guideline for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit Kristian Rørbæk Madsen, Kristian Lorentzen, Niels Clausen, Emilie Øberg, Peter Roy Casparij Kirkegaard, Nana Maymann-Holler & Morten Hylander Møller. This guideline has been approved by the Danish Society of Anesthesiology and to Danish conditions are few. Thus the current incidence of stress Intensive Care Medicine (DASAIM) and the Danish Society of Intensive Care Medicine ulcer bleeding in ICU patients is largely unknown. (DSIT) 26 January 2014 Correspondence: Kristian Rørbæk Madsen, Department of Anesthesiology and Risk factors Intensive Care, Odense University Hospital, Soendre Boulevard 29, 5000 Odense C, In a prospective multicenter cohort study (n=2256) by Cook et al, Denmark risk factors for clinically important GI bleeding were mechanical E-mail: [email protected] ventilation for more than 48 hours (odds ratio 15.6) and coagulopathy (odds ratio 4.3) 3. Other commonly cited, but less Conflicts of interests: Morten Hylander Møller is the initiator of the “SUP-ICU re- validated risk factors include severe sepsis and septic shock as search programme” (www.sup-icu.com). The remaining authors reported no con- flicts of interests. stated by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines; head or spinal trauma, hepatic failure, renal failure, major burns, organ trans- plantation, high dose glucocorticoid therapy, previous peptic 1,10 Dan Med J 2014;61(3):C4811. ulcer disease or upper GI bleeding . Last literature review: Nov 1 2013 Prognosis Limitations : Applies to patients aged > 18 years Stress ulcer bleeding is a serious complication. Cook et al. demon- strated a mortality rate of 49%, mostly from decompensation of List of abbreviations: an underlying condition or multiorgan failure, compared to 9% for H2RA = histamine-2-receptor antagonist patients without GI bleeding 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Discontinue Stress, Discontinue Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis
    Volume 22, Number 1 January 2008 Drugs & Therapy B � U � L � L � E � T � I � N FORMULARY UPDATE PRESCRIBING The Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee met November 20, 2007. Discontinue stress, discontinue 2 drugs were added in the Formu- lary, and 4 drugs or dosage forms stress ulcer prophylaxis were deleted. 5 drugs or dosage tress ulcers are superficial lesions should be discontinued in patients with- forms were designated nonformulary involving the mucosal layer of the out an additional indication for use (eg, and not available. Criteria for use S stomach that appear after major stressful gastrointestinal reflux disease [GERD] or were changed for 3 drugs. events.1 Critically ill patients admitted history of GI bleed). When a patient trans- to intensive care units (ICUs) are at an fers or is discharged from an ICU, there is ◆ ADDED increased risk for suffering from compli- an opportunity to discontinue SUP. Ambrisentan cations related to stress ulceration.2 As An audit of SUP use in the ICUs at (Letairis® by Gilead Sciences)* such, stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is Shands at UF was recently conducted. *Restricted to patients approved for the appropriate for many critically ill patients. Thirty adult patients receiving SUP were Letairis Education and Access Program SUP is defined as any medication used followed during their hospital admis- to prevent formation of stress ulcers and sion, beginning upon admission to the Anidulafungin includes antacids, sucralfate, prostaglan- surgical intensive care unit (SICU). When (Eraxis® by Pfizer)† din analogues, histamine H2-receptor mechanical ventilation and coagulopathy †Restricted to approval by the ID antagonists, and proton-pump inhibitors were no longer present, SUP was no lon- Consult Service, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • ERR-0107-2019 Table S5
    Table S5. Studies included in the systematic reviews with meta-analysis Diagnosis of Inclusion Intervention (I) and Cointerventions a Study n Characteristic of Exclusion criteria VAP criteria Control (C) groups and VAP Bundle b ICU/ patients Surgical ICU (I): Cointervention: Polyurethane- Patients transferred from other TaperGuard EVACTM tubes: cone shape cuff (I): hospitals, urgent intubation in equipped with SSD port, APACHE II: 22.6 ± 5.1 MV>48h, clinical wards other than ICU, history polyurethane and cone shape VAP bundle: ICU LOS: 15 ± 5 features (CPIS) and Age between 18 and of MV, pregnancy, HIV, cuff. - Head elevation of 45º. Duration MV: 11.6 ± 7.1 bacterial pathogens 80 yr requiring immunosuppression, Method of SSD: Intermittent Mahmoodpoor - Protocolized enteral feeding. 276 ≥104 CFU/ml in mechanical ventilation leukopenia, patient refusal, and every 6h et al, 2017 - Sedation with washout periods. quantitative culture for more than 72 hours acute respiratory distress - Oral hygiene with (C): from bronchoalveolar with placement of an syndrome. Patients who were (C): chlorhexidine. APACHE II: 21.4 ± 4.4 lavage. endotracheal tube receiving antibiotics at the time Conventional high-volume - Hand washing. ICU LOS: 18 ± 10 of intubation, and those who low-pressure endotracheal - Pantoprazol for stress ulcer Duration MV: 12.3 ± 10.5 need a PEEP>5cm H2O. tubes prophylaxis. ICUs at Harborview Cointervention: Polyurethane- Medical Center. (I): cuffed 1) a polyurethane-conical (I): Patients with out-of-hospital shaped cuffed tube VAP bundle: SAPS II: 60 ± 12 cardiac arrest. 2) a polyurethane- conical - Head elevation of 45º. ICU LOS: N/A Adults (>18 yr of age) Use of a non–study-designated shaped cuffed tube with - Protocolized enteral feeding.
    [Show full text]
  • Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis Clinical Guidelines
    Last Approval Date: November 2019 Policy Title: Pharmacist-Managed Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis Protocol Departments Affected: Pharmacy Page 1 of 5 Key Words: SUP, PPI, H2RA Reference #: 1835 I. PURPOSE: To ensure safe, evidence-based utilization of stress ulcer prophylaxis in the inpatient setting to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding while minimizing the associated adverse effects (Clostridium dificile colitis, nosocomial pneumonia, electrolyte abnormalities, vitamin deficiencies, drug interactions, thrombocytopenia, etc) through use of a standardized, pharmacist-managed protcol. II. POLICY: It is the policy of SHC to provide a process for pharmacists to discontinue or convert stress ulcer prophylaxis therapies (proton pump inhibitors to histamine-2 receptor agonists) in the inpatient setting to align with current practice guidelines and literature. Exclusions: Continuation of home therapy or PRN use in the inpatient setting Use of acid suppression therapy for treatment indications III. PROCEDURE: A. Evaluation 1. Pharmacists will screen patients receiving scheduled acid suppression therapy for indication at the time of order verification and on a daily basis thereafter. 2. If the indication for PPI or H2RA use is treatment as listed below, or the frequency is PRN (as needed), the pharmacist will not intervene. a. Zollinger-Ellison Syndrome b. Acute upper GI bleed c. Erosive esophagitis d. Helicobacter pylori treatment e. Gastric or duodenal ulcer f. Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) g. Continuation of home therapy 3. If the indication for PPI or H2RA use is stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP), pharmacists will perform a detailed review of the patient’s chart to determine whether the patient meets any of the following approved criteria for therapy4: a.
    [Show full text]
  • Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit – Adult/Pediatric/Neonatal – Inpatient Clinical Practice Guideline
    Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit – Adult/Pediatric/Neonatal – Inpatient Clinical Practice Guideline Note: Active Table of Contents – Click to follow link EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 3 SCOPE ...................................................................................................................................... 4 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................... 4 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................................ 5 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 5 RECOMMENDATIONS – ADULT ICU PATIENTS .................................................................... 8 RECOMMENDATIONS – PEDIATRIC ICU PATIENTS ............................................................10 RECOMMENDATIONS – NEONATAL ICU PATIENTS ............................................................10 RECOMMENDATIONS – ADULT, PEDIATRIC, AND NEONATAL ICU PATIENTS ................12 UW HEALTH IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................13 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................14 REFERENCES .........................................................................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • Original Article Perioperative Application of Proton Pump Inhibitors to Prevent Stress Ulcer
    Int J Clin Exp Med 2016;9(8):16771-16776 www.ijcem.com /ISSN:1940-5901/IJCEM0028559 Original Article Perioperative application of proton pump inhibitors to prevent stress ulcer Yanhong Wang, Weijuan Song Department of Pharmacy, The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450052, China Received March 17, 2016; Accepted June 12, 2016; Epub August 15, 2016; Published August 30, 2016 Abstract: Background: Patients with surgeries are prone to the occurrence of stress ulcer when under the stress sta- tus. Currently, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are often used in clinical surgeries to prevent stress ulcer (SU). Purpose: To assess the rationality of perioperative application of PPI to prevent SU. Methods: Two hundred and thirty-eight patients performing surgeries in the department of vascular surgery were enrolled in this study, and 204 patients applied PPI to prevent the perioperative SU. Their basic situations and rationalities of PPI application in these 204 patients were analyzed. Results: The ratio of perioperative PPI application in preventing SU was 85.71% (204/238), while only 47.06% (96/204) of patients had the risk factors of SU. 96.08% (196/204) of administration routes were intravenous. 87.06% (222/255) of PPI injection medical orders selected normal saline as appropriate solvent of PPI. The problems such as too large dosage, long duration and frequent medication-change still existed for PPI application. Conclusion: When applying PPI to prevent SU, there still exist further optimization in aspects such as indications,
    [Show full text]