Dataset Information

Comparison of the Hospital-Acquired Clostridium difficile Infection Risk of Using Proton Pump Inhibitors versus Histamine-2 Receptor Antagonists for Prophylaxis and Treatment of Stress Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background/aims

Although proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been widely used for the prevention and treatment of stress gastric ulcers in hospital settings, there are concerns that PPIs increase the risk of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). However, little is known about the risk of CDI following PPI and histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) use. We evaluated the comparative hospital-acquired CDI occurrence risk associated with the concurrent use of PPIs versus H2RAs.

Methods

A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE/Ovid, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, and Google Scholar through August 19, 2016, identified 12 studies that reported the hospital-acquired CDI occurrence following H2RA and PPI use for the prevention and treatment of stress gastric ulcers. Random-effects pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Heterogeneity was measured using I², and a meta-regression analysis was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the overall quality of the evidence.

Results

A total of 74,132 patients from 12 observational studies were analyzed. Compared to H2RAs, PPIs increased the risk of CDI by 38.6% (pooled odds ratio, 1.386; 95% confidence interval, 1.152 to 1.668; p=0.001; I²=42.81%). Subgroup analyses of the purpose of study medication use, study site, and study design confirmed the consistency of a greater CDI risk with PPIs than with H2RAs. The overall quality of evidence was rated as low.

Conclusions

The use of PPIs for both the prevention and treatment of stress ulcers was associated with a 38.6% increased risk of hospital-acquired CDI occurrence compared to H2RA use.

SUBMITTER: Azab M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5669593 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of the Hospital-Acquired <i>Clostridium difficile</i> Infection Risk of Using Proton Pump Inhibitors versus Histamine-2 Receptor Antagonists for Prophylaxis and Treatment of Stress Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Azab Mohamed M Doo Loomee L Doo Daniel H DH Elmofti Yousif Y Ahmed Muazer M Cadavona John Jay JJ Liu Xibei B XB Shafi Amaan A Joo Moon Kyung MK Yoo Ji Won JW

Gut and liver 20171101 6

<h4>Background/aims</h4>Although proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been widely used for the prevention and treatment of stress gastric ulcers in hospital settings, there are concerns that PPIs increase the risk of <i>Clostridium difficile</i> infection (CDI). However, little is known about the risk of CDI following PPI and histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) use. We evaluated the comparative hospital-acquired CDI occurrence risk associated with the concurrent use of PPIs versus H2RAs.<h4>Met ...[more]

PMID: 28506028

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAntibiotic disruption of the normal intestinal flora is a well-known risk factor for Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. Reduced gastric acidity has been suggested as a risk factor, and we hypothesized that proton pump inhibitors, because of their potency, may be an independent risk factor for this problem.MethodsFor the cohort study we identified from a pharmacy database 1187 inpatients at a Montreal teaching hospital who received antibiotics over a 9-month period beginning in August 2002. We compared patients in this group who had also received a proton pump inhibitor or an H(2) blocker with patients who had not received acid suppressive therapy. Hospital laboratory reports of positive assay results for C. difficile toxin were used to ascertain cases in the cohort. To assess the possibility that proton pump inhibitors were prescribed to patients who were sicker and had other risk factors for C. difficile infection, we did a case-control study at a second Montreal teaching hospital. Cases were defined as patients who were positive for C. difficile toxin and who had a history of diarrhea (n = 94). Control subjects were selected from among patients who had received an antibiotic and were matched to cases by ward, age within 5 years and class of antibiotics (n = 94).ResultsIn the cohort study, C. difficile diarrhea developed in 81 (6.8%) of the 1187 patients who received antibiotics while in hospital. In a multivariate analysis, C. difficile diarrhea was significantly associated with use of proton pump inhibitors (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2- 3.5), receipt of 3 or more antibiotics (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3- 3.4) and admission to a medical ward (OR 4.1, 95% CI 2.3- 7.3). In the case-control study C. difficile diarrhea was associated with female sex (adjusted OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-4.0), prior renal failure (adjusted OR 4.3, 95% CI 1.5-11.9), hospital admission in the 3 months before the index admission (adjusted OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.4-5.2) and use of proton pump inhibitors (adjusted OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4-5.2).InterpretationPatients in hospital who received proton pump inhibitors were at increased risk of C. difficile diarrhea.

Project description:BackgroundThe role of the gut microbiome in arresting pathogen colonization and growth is important for protection against Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). Observational studies associate proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and CDI incidence. We hypothesized that PPI use affected the distal gut microbiome over time, an effect that would be best explored by time-longitudinal study of healthy subjects on PPI in comparison to treatment-naïve CDI subjects. This study enrolled nine healthy human subjects and five subjects with treatment-naïve CDI. After random assignment to a low (20 mg/day) or high (2× 20 mg/day) dose group, fecal samples were collected from the nine healthy subjects before, during, and after 28 days of PPI use. This was done in conjunction with pre-treatment fecal collection from CDI subjects. High-throughput sequencing (16S rRNA) was performed on time-longitudinal samples to assess changes to the healthy gut microbiome associated with prolonged PPI usage. The healthy samples were then compared to the CDI subjects to explore changes over time to the gut microbiome associated with PPI use and potentially related to CDI.ResultsWe report that PPI usage at low and high dosages, administered for 28 days, resulted in decreases to observed operational taxonomic unit (OTU) counts after both 1 week and 1 month. This decrease resulted in observed OTU levels that were similar to those found in treatment-naïve CDI patients, which was partly reversible after a 1 month recovery period. We did not detect a dose-dependent difference in OTU levels nor did we detect significant changes in taxa previously reported to be affected by PPI treatment.ConclusionWhile our observation of diminishing observed OTU counts during PPI therapy is a preliminary finding in a small cohort, our hypothesis that PPIs disrupt the healthy human gut microbiome is supported in this group. We conclude that decreases in observed species counts were reversible after cessation of PPI usage within 1 month. This finding may be a potential explanation for the association between prolonged PPI usage and CDI incidence.

Project description:BackgroundProton pump inhibitors (PPI) and histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) have been widely used as stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in critically ill patients, however, its efficacy and safety remain unclear. This study aimed to assess the effect of SUP on clinical outcomes in critically ill adults.MethodsLiterature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane database of clinical trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated SUP, with PPI or H2RA, versus placebo or no prophylaxis in critically ill patients from database inception through 1 June 2019. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed in duplicate. The primary outcomes were clinically important gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and overt GI bleeding. Conventional meta-analysis with random-effects model and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed.ResultsTwenty-nine RCTs were identified, of which four RCTs were judged as low risk of bias. Overall, SUP could reduce the incident of clinically important GI bleeding [relative risk (RR)?=?0.58; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.42-0.81] and overt GI bleeding (RR?=?0.48; 95% CI: 0.36-0.63), these results were confirmed by the sub-analysis of trials with low risk of bias, TSA indicated a firm evidence on its beneficial effects on the overt GI bleeding (TSA-adjusted CI: 0.31-0.75), but lack of sufficient evidence on the clinically important GI bleeding (TSA-adjusted CI: 0.23-1.51). Among patients who received enteral nutrition (EN), SUP was associated with a decreased risk of clinically important GI bleeding (RR?=?0.61; 95% CI: 0.44-0.85; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.16-2.38) and overt GI bleeding (RR?=?0.64; 95% CI: 0.42-0.96; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.12-3.35), but these benefits disappeared after adjustment with TSA. Among patients who did not receive EN, SUP had only benefits in reducing the risk of overt GI bleeding (RR?=?0.37; 95% CI: 0.25-0.55; TSA-adjusted CI: 0.22-0.63), but not the clinically important GI bleeding (RR?=?0.27; 95% CI: 0.04-2.09).ConclusionsSUP has benefits on the overt GI bleeding in critically ill patients who did not receive EN, however, its benefits on clinically important GI bleeding still needs more evidence to confirm.