+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

The efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors vs histamine-2 receptor antagonists for stress ulcer bleeding prophylaxis among critical care patients: a meta-analysis



The efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors vs histamine-2 receptor antagonists for stress ulcer bleeding prophylaxis among critical care patients: a meta-analysis



Critical Care Medicine 38(4): 1197-1205



To examine the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors in comparison with histamine-2 receptor antagonists for stress-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis among critical care patients. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomized, controlled trials that directly compare proton pump inhibitors with histamine-2 receptor antagonists in prevention of stress-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding in intensive care unit patients published before May 30, 2008. Two reviewers independently applied selection criteria, performed quality assessment, and extracted data. The primary outcome was the incidence of stress-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and the secondary outcome measures were the incidence of pneumonia and intensive care unit mortality. The random effect model was used to estimate the pooled risk difference between two treatment arms irrespective of drug, dosage, and route of administration. We identified seven randomized, controlled trials with a total of 936 patients for planned comparison. The overall pooled risk difference (95% confidence interval; p value; I statistics) of stress-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding comparing proton pump inhibitors vs. histamine-2 receptor antagonists was -0.04 (95% confidence interval, -0.09-0.01; p = .08; I = 66%). In the sensitivity analysis, removing the Levy study significantly reduced the heterogeneity (from I = 66% to I = 26%) and shifted the overall risk difference closer to the null (pooled risk difference, -0.02; 95% confidence interval, -0.05-0.01; p = .19). There was no difference between proton pump inhibitors and histamine-2 receptor antagonists therapy in the risk of pneumonia and intensive care unit mortality, with pooled risk differences of 0.00 (95% confidence interval, -0.04-0.05; p = .86; I = 0%) and 0.02 (95% confidence interval, -0.04-0.08; p = .50; I = 0%), respectively. This meta-analysis did not find strong evidence that proton pump inhibitors were different from histamine-2 receptor antagonists in terms of stress-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis, pneumonia, and mortality among patients admitted to intensive care units. Because of limited trial data, future well-designed and powerful randomized, clinical trials are warranted.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 056326197

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 20173630

DOI: 10.1097/ccm.0b013e3181d69ccf


Related references

Proton pump inhibitors versus histamine 2 receptor antagonists for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Critical Care Medicine 41(3): 693-705, 2013

W1904 Proton Pump Inhibitors Versus Histamine 2 Receptor Antagonists or Sucralfate for Stress Related Mucosal Bleeding Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients: A Follow-Up Meta-Analysis. Gastroenterology 134(4): A-731, 2008

W1019 Proton Pump Inhibitors Versus H2-Receptor Antagonists for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Mechanically Ventilated Intensive Care Patients: A Meta-Analysis. Gastroenterology 136(5): A-636, 2009

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. Intensive Care Medicine 45(2): 143-158, 2019

Cost-effectiveness analysis: stress ulcer bleeding prophylaxis with proton pump inhibitors, H2 receptor antagonists. Value in Health 16(1): 14-22, 2013

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Critical Care 20(1): 120, 2016

Bleeding and pneumonia in intensive care unit patients given proton pump inhibitor or histamine-2 receptor antagonist for prevention of stress ulcer: a Meta analysis. Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue 22(4): 221-225, 2010

Proton pump inhibitors versus H2 antagonists A meta-analysis of its efficacy on bleeding peptic ulcer. Gut 49(Suppl. 11): A86, 2001

Proton pump inhibitors versus H2-antagonists: A meta-analysis of their efficacy in treating bleeding peptic ulcer. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 15(7): 917-926, 2001

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. Gut and Liver 11(6): 781-788, 2017

Cost-Effectiveness of Histamine 2 Receptor Antagonists Versus Proton Pump Inhibitors for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients. PharmacoTherapy 37(1): 43-53, 2017

Proton pump inhibitors versus histamine-2-receptor antagonists for the management of iatrogenic gastric ulcer after endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Digestion 84(4): 315-320, 2011

Prevention of stress induced ulcers: histamine-2 receptor antagonists or proton pump inhibitors? - gastric hemorrhage occur more often under proton pump inhibitors. DeutscheMedizinischeWochenschrift139(25-26):1338, 2014

Sucralfate versus histamine 2 receptor antagonists for stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult critically ill patients: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized trials. Journal of Critical Care 40: 21-30, 2017

Effect of histamine-2-receptor antagonists versus sucralfate on stress ulcer prophylaxis in mechanically ventilated patients: a meta-analysis of 10 randomized controlled trials. Critical Care 14(5): R194, 2010