Cargando…

Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION: Neurocritical care patients are at high risk for stress-related upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in this patient group. METHODS: A systematic search of major electronic literatu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Bolin, Liu, Shujuan, Yin, Anan, Siddiqi, Javed
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4650140/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26577436
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1107-2
_version_ 1782401453386629120
author Liu, Bolin
Liu, Shujuan
Yin, Anan
Siddiqi, Javed
author_facet Liu, Bolin
Liu, Shujuan
Yin, Anan
Siddiqi, Javed
author_sort Liu, Bolin
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Neurocritical care patients are at high risk for stress-related upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in this patient group. METHODS: A systematic search of major electronic literature databases was conducted. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which researchers compared the effects of SUP (with proton pump inhibitors or histamine 2 receptor antagonists) with placebo or no prophylaxis in neurocritical care patients. The primary outcome was UGI bleeding, and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and nosocomial pneumonia. Study heterogeneity was sought and quantified. The results were reported as risk ratios/relative risks (RRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We included 8 RCTs comprising an aggregate of 829 neurocritical care patients. Among these trials, one study conducted in a non–intensive care unit setting that did not meet our inclusion criteria was ultimately included based on further evaluation. All studies were judged as having a high or unclear risk of bias. SUP was more effective than placebo or no prophylaxis at reducing UGI bleeding (random effects: RR 0.31; 95 % CI 0.20–0.47; P < 0.00001; I(2) = 45 %) and all-cause mortality (fixed effects: RR 0.70; 95 % CI 0.50–0.98; P = 0.04; I(2) = 0 %). There was no difference between SUP and placebo or no prophylaxis regarding nosocomial pneumonia (random effects: RR 1.14; 95 % CI 0.67–1.94; P = 0.62; I(2) = 42 %). The slight asymmetry of the funnel plots raised the concern of small trial bias, and apparent heterogeneity existed in participants, interventions, control treatments, and outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: In neurocritical care patients, SUP seems to be more effective than placebo or no prophylaxis in preventing UGI bleeding and reducing all-cause mortality while not increasing the risk of nosocomial pneumonia. The robustness of this conclusion is limited by a lack of trials with a low risk of bias, sparse data, heterogeneity among trials, and a concern regarding small trial bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) identifier: CRD42015015802. Date of registration: 6 Jan 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-1107-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4650140
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46501402015-11-19 Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Liu, Bolin Liu, Shujuan Yin, Anan Siddiqi, Javed Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: Neurocritical care patients are at high risk for stress-related upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in this patient group. METHODS: A systematic search of major electronic literature databases was conducted. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which researchers compared the effects of SUP (with proton pump inhibitors or histamine 2 receptor antagonists) with placebo or no prophylaxis in neurocritical care patients. The primary outcome was UGI bleeding, and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and nosocomial pneumonia. Study heterogeneity was sought and quantified. The results were reported as risk ratios/relative risks (RRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We included 8 RCTs comprising an aggregate of 829 neurocritical care patients. Among these trials, one study conducted in a non–intensive care unit setting that did not meet our inclusion criteria was ultimately included based on further evaluation. All studies were judged as having a high or unclear risk of bias. SUP was more effective than placebo or no prophylaxis at reducing UGI bleeding (random effects: RR 0.31; 95 % CI 0.20–0.47; P < 0.00001; I(2) = 45 %) and all-cause mortality (fixed effects: RR 0.70; 95 % CI 0.50–0.98; P = 0.04; I(2) = 0 %). There was no difference between SUP and placebo or no prophylaxis regarding nosocomial pneumonia (random effects: RR 1.14; 95 % CI 0.67–1.94; P = 0.62; I(2) = 42 %). The slight asymmetry of the funnel plots raised the concern of small trial bias, and apparent heterogeneity existed in participants, interventions, control treatments, and outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: In neurocritical care patients, SUP seems to be more effective than placebo or no prophylaxis in preventing UGI bleeding and reducing all-cause mortality while not increasing the risk of nosocomial pneumonia. The robustness of this conclusion is limited by a lack of trials with a low risk of bias, sparse data, heterogeneity among trials, and a concern regarding small trial bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) identifier: CRD42015015802. Date of registration: 6 Jan 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-1107-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-11-17 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4650140/ /pubmed/26577436 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1107-2 Text en © Liu et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Liu, Bolin
Liu, Shujuan
Yin, Anan
Siddiqi, Javed
Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis in adult neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4650140/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26577436
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1107-2
work_keys_str_mv AT liubolin risksandbenefitsofstressulcerprophylaxisinadultneurocriticalcarepatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT liushujuan risksandbenefitsofstressulcerprophylaxisinadultneurocriticalcarepatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT yinanan risksandbenefitsofstressulcerprophylaxisinadultneurocriticalcarepatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT siddiqijaved risksandbenefitsofstressulcerprophylaxisinadultneurocriticalcarepatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials