Pantoprazole prophylaxis in ICU patients with high severity of disease: a post hoc analysis of the placebo-controlled SUP-ICU trial

Proton Pump Inhibitors Versus Histamine-2 Receptor Blockers for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis on In-hospital Mortality Among Intensive Care Unit Patients Hospitalized for Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Events: Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) commonly receive stress ulcer prophylaxis drugs, either proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2 receptor blockers (H2RBs). The goal of this research was to evaluate the impact of these drugs on mortality among ICU patients hospitalized for major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs).

METHODS

ICU patients hospitalized for MACCEs were sourced from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III database. We performed a propensity score matching analysis to match patients treated with PPIs to those treated with H2RBs for stress ulcer prophylaxis. The outcome was 90-day mortality. We used multivariable Cox regression analyses to compare the effect. Hazard ratio (HR), 95% CIs, and P values were reported from the model.

FINDINGS

From 2001 to 2012, a total of 3577 patients hospitalized for MACCEs (1997 received PPIs and 1580 received H2RBs) were admitted. The 90-day mortality was 23.7% (848/3577); it was 27% (540/1997) and 19.5% (308/1580) for PPIs and H2RBs users, respectively. The PPI group exhibited a greater 90‑day mortality in comparison to the H2RBs group (relative risk = 1.17; P = 0.036), after conditioning on potential confounder. The results remained robust in propensity score matching, sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analyses.

IMPLICATIONS

PPIs for stress ulcer prophylaxis were linked to an increased risk of in-hospital mortality than H2RBs in patients hospitalized for MACCEs. Further investigation of this association and validation of its clinical significance is needed.

Society of Critical Care Medicine and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Guideline for the Prevention of Stress-Related Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Critically Ill Adults

RATIONALE

Critically ill adults can develop stress-related mucosal damage from gastrointestinal hypoperfusion and reperfusion injury, predisposing them to clinically important stress-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB).

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this guideline was to develop evidence-based recommendations for the prevention of UGIB in adults in the ICU.

DESIGN

A multiprofessional panel of 18 international experts from dietetics, critical care medicine, nursing, and pharmacy, and two methodologists developed evidence-based recommendations in alignment with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Conflict-of-interest policies were strictly followed during all phases of guideline development including task force selection and voting.

METHODS

The panel members identified and formulated 13 Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome questions. We conducted a systematic review for each question to identify the best available evidence, statistically analyzed the evidence, and then assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate the recommendations. Good practice statements were included to provide additional guidance.

RESULTS

The panel generated nine conditional recommendations and made four good practice statements. Factors that likely increase the risk for clinically important stress-related UGIB in critically ill adults include coagulopathy, shock, and chronic liver disease. There is no firm evidence for mechanical ventilation alone being a risk factor. Enteral nutrition probably reduces UGIB risk. All critically ill adults with factors that likely increase the risk for stress-related UGIB should receive either proton pump inhibitors or histamine-2 receptor antagonists, at low dosage regimens, to prevent UGIB. Prophylaxis should be discontinued when critical illness is no longer evident or the risk factor(s) is no longer present despite ongoing critical illness. Discontinuation of stress ulcer prophylaxis before transfer out of the ICU is necessary to prevent inappropriate prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

The guideline panel achieved consensus regarding the recommendations for the prevention of stress-related UGIB. These recommendations are intended for consideration along with the patient's existing clinical status.

Peptic ulcer disease

Annual prevalence estimates of peptic ulcer disease range between 0·12% and 1·5%. Peptic ulcer disease is usually attributable to Helicobacter pylori infection, intake of some medications (such as aspirin and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications), or being critically ill (stress-related), or it can be idiopathic. The clinical presentation is usually uncomplicated, with peptic ulcer disease management based on eradicating H pylori if present, the use of acid-suppressing medications-most often proton pump inhibitors (PPIs)-or addressing complications, such as with early endoscopy and high-dose PPIs for peptic ulcer bleeding. Special considerations apply to patients on antiplatelet and antithrombotic agents. H pylori treatment has evolved, with the choice of regimen dictated by local antibiotic resistance patterns. Indications for primary and secondary prophylaxis vary across societies; most suggest PPIs for patients at highest risk of developing a peptic ulcer, its complications, or its recurrence. Additional research areas include the use of potassium-competitive acid blockers and H pylori vaccination; the optimal approach for patients at risk of stress ulcer bleeding requires more robust determinations of optimal patient selection and treatment selection, if any. Appropriate continuation of PPI use outweighs most possible side-effects if given for approved indications, while de-prescribing should be trialled when a definitive indication is no longer present.

Associated Mortality Risk of Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy for the Prevention of Stress Ulceration in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

GOALS

The aim was to systematically evaluate risks and benefits of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use for stress ulcer prophylaxis in the critically ill patient.

BACKGROUND

Whether PPIs increase mortality in the critically ill patient remains controversial.

STUDY

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies with trial sequential analysis, Bayesian sensitivity analysis, and fragility index analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies in 78,009 critically ill adults receiving PPIs versus any comparator were included. PPI use was associated with an increased mortality risk in all studies [19.6% PPI vs. 17.5% comparator; RR: 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-1.20; P =0.01], in the subgroup of RCTs (19.4% vs. 18.7%; RR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.0-1.09, P =0.04), but not cohort studies (19.9% vs. 16.7%; RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.98-1.28, P =0.09). Results were maintained with a Bayesian sensitivity analysis (RR: 1.13; 95% credible interval: 1.035-1.227) and a fragility index analysis, but not sequential analysis ( P =0.16). RCTs with a higher baseline severity of illness revealed the greatest mortality risk with PPI use (32.1% PPI vs. 29.4% comparator; RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.04-1.14; P <0.001). PPI use reduced clinically important bleeding in RCTs (1.4% PPI vs. 2.1% comparator; RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.5-0.9; P =0.009) but increased bleeding in cohort studies (2.7% PPI vs. 1.2% comparator; RR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.2-3.52; P =0.009). PPI use was not associated with a lower incidence of clinically important bleeding when compared with histamine-2 receptor antagonists (1.3% vs. 1.9%; RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.28-1.25, P =0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrated an association between PPI use and an increased risk of mortality.

CYP2C19 Gene Profiling as a Tool for Personalized Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis With Proton Pump Inhibitors in Critically Ill Patients - Recommendations Proposal

To this date, there are no recommendations for personalized stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) in critical care that would take the patient's individual genetic predispositions into account. Of drugs used for this purpose, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the first-choice drugs in intensive care unit patients. The degradation of proton pump inhibitors is mediated by cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes; in particular, CYP2C19 and, to a lesser extent, CYP3A4 are involved. Expression and metabolic activity of, namely in, CYP2C19 is significantly affected by single nucleotide polymorphisms, the drug metabolization rate varies greatly from ultrarapid to poor and likely influences the optimal dosage. As these CYP2C19 predictive phenotypes via CYP2C19 haplogenotypes (rs12248560/rs4244285) can be relatively easily determined using the current standard equipment of hospital laboratories, we prepared a set of recommendations for personalized PPI-based stress ulcer prophylaxis taking into account the patient's CYP2C19 predictive phenotype determined in this way. These recommendations are valid, in particular, for European, American and African populations, because these populations have the high representations of the CYP2C19^*17 allele associated with the overexpression of the CYP2C19 gene and ultrarapid degradation of PPIs. We propose the CYP2C19 gene profiling as a tool for personalized SUP with PPI in critically ill patients.

Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Adult Patients with Sepsis at Risk of Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines recommend stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) for patients with sepsis who have gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding risks, however, the effect of SUP has not been specially studied in these patients.

AIMS

The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of SUP versus no prophylaxis on patient-important outcomes in critically ill adult patients with sepsis who have risk factors for GI bleeding.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study utilized data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III database. We compared those who received SUP with proton pump inhibitors or histamine-2 receptor antagonists for ≥3 days with those who received no prophylaxis. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to make comparisons between groups with similar distributions of study variables. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 7,744 patients were included in the analysis, with 1,088 (14.0%) in the non-SUP group and 6,656 (86.0%) in the SUP group. A 1:1 PSM created 866 patients in each cohort. No significant differences were noted between the two groups with regard to in-hospital mortality (22.3%vs.20.4%, p=0.379), GI bleeding (4.7%vs.6.4%, p=0.172), pneumonia(38.9%vs.36.6%,p=0.346), Clostridium difficile infection(6.4% vs. 8.9%, p=0.0.057), or ICU length of stay (LOS) (4.2 d vs. 4.6 d, p=0.394).

CONCLUSIONS

Among critically ill, septic, adult patients at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, stress ulcer prophylaxis showed no effect on hospital mortality, the rate of GI bleeding, pneumonia, CDI, and ICU LOS. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Comparison of proton pump inhibitors and histamine 2 receptor antagonists for stress ulcer prophylaxis in the intensive care unit

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), followed by histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), are the most commonly used drugs to prevent gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients through stress ulcer prophylaxis. The relative efficacy and drug-related adverse events of PPIs and H2RAs remain unclear. In this retrospective, observational, comparative cohort study, PPIs and H2RAs for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients were compared using a common data model. After propensity matching, 935 patients from each treatment group (PPI or H2RA) were selected. The PPI group had a significantly higher 90-day mortality than the H2RA group (relative risk: 1.28; P = 0.01). However, no significant inter-group differences in the risk of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding were observed. Moreover, there were no significant differences between the groups concerning the risk of pneumonia or Clostridioides difficile infection, which are known potential adverse events related to these drugs. Subgroup analysis of patients with high disease severity were consistent with those of the total propensity score-matched population. These findings do not support the current recommendations, which prefer PPIs for gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in the intensive care unit.

The efficacy and safety of acid suppressants for gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in cardiac care unit patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Concerns regarding adverse events associated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) prophylaxis in the intensive care unit have increased in recent years. Few studies have focused on acid suppressant use in the cardiac care unit (CCU) setting exclusively. We performed a cohort study to determine the efficacy and safety of acid suppressants for GIB prophylaxis in CCU patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included adults who were admitted directly to the CCU for more than 2 days from January 1, 2014, to April 30, 2019. The Crusade score was calculated to evaluate the risk of GIB. The primary outcomes were clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding (CIGIB), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 3318 patients enrolled, 2284 (68.8%) patients received PPIs, 515 (15.5%) received H2RAs, and 519 (15.7%) received no acid suppressants. After adjusting for potential confounders, utilization of PPIs (2.69, 95% confidence interval [0.62-11.73]) and H2RAs (1.41, 95% confidence interval [0.19-10.36]) were not associated with a lower risk of CIGIB than the control. Sensitivity analyses revealed that PPI use was an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality in patients over 75 years old, with an adjusted odds ratio of 4.08 (1.14-14.63). PPIs increased the risk of HAP in patients over 75 years old and in those with heart failure, with adjusted odds ratios of 2.38 (1.06-5.34) and 2.88 (1.34-7.28), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Proton pump inhibitors and H2RAs for GIB prophylaxis in CCU patients were not associated with a lower risk of CIGIB than the controls. PPI therapy is associated with increased risks of HAP and in-hospital mortality in patients over 75 years old. PPIs may increase the risk of HAP in patients with heart failure.

Predictors of gastrointestinal bleeding in adult ICU patients in the SUP-ICU trial

BACKGROUND

In previous studies of predictors of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU), most patients received pharmacological stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP). We aimed to assess associations between potential predictors of clinically important GI bleeding (CIB) and overt GI bleeding in adult ICU patients, while considering the effect and potential interaction with use of SUP.

METHODS

We included 3291 acutely admitted adult ICU patients with risk factors for GI bleeding randomized to SUP (pantoprazole) or placebo in the SUP-ICU trial. We used logistic regression models adjusted for allocation to SUP to estimate associations between 23 potential predictors and CIB (primary outcome) and overt GI bleeding (secondary outcome). Furthermore, we assessed associations between potential predictors and both outcomes in each allocation group and assessed potential interaction with allocation to SUP.

RESULTS

Increasing SAPS II and SOFA scores, use of circulatory support and renal replacement therapy were associated with increased risk of CIB and overt GI bleeding; chronic lung disease was associated with increased risk of overt GI bleeding. Results for the remaining potential predictors were compatible with both no difference or increased and decreased risks. We found no strong evidence for any interaction between treatment allocation and any potential predictors.

CONCLUSION

In adult ICU patients at risk of GI bleeding, severity of illness, use of circulatory support and renal replacement therapy were associated with higher odds of CIB, with no strong evidence of interaction with SUP.

Gastrointestinal failure score in children with traumatic brain injury

BACKGROUND

To review the value of the gastrointestinal failure (GIF) score in children with different degrees of traumatic brain injury (TBI) by analyzing the correlation between outcome and gastrointestinal function.

METHODS

A total of 165 children with TBI who were diagnosed and treated in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU) for longer than 72 h between August 2017 and September 2019 were analyzed. Admission parameters included sex, age, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, body mass index (BMI), leukocyte count, C-reactive protein (CRP), hemoglobin (Hb), hematocrit (Hct), blood glucose, lactic acid, procalcitonin (PCT), albumin, plasma osmotic pressure, prothrombin time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT). To predict outcomes, the Pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Pediatric Clinical Illness Score (PCIS), and mean GIF score for the first three days were combined.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients with gastrointestinal dysfunction on the first day was 78.8 %. Food intolerance (FI) and intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) developed in 36.4 and 21.8 % of the patients, respectively. The GIF score and mean GIF score for the first three days were significantly different between children with different degrees of TBI (P < 0.05); these scores were also significantly different between patients who died and those who survived (P < 0.05). The mean GIF score for the first three days was identified as an independent risk factor for mortality (odds ratio > 1, 95 % confidence interval = 1.457 to 16.016, P < 0.01), as was the PCIS. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis suggested that the mean GIF score for the first three days had the same calibrating power as the PCIS in discriminating the risk of death of children.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of gastrointestinal dysfunction in children with TBI is high. The GIF score has the ability to reflect the status of the gastrointestinal system. The mean GIF score for the first three days has high prognostic value for ICU mortality in the SICU.

Prevention of gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review focuses on the current literature on the epidemiology and prevention of stress-induced clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding in ICU patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

The incidence of stress-induced clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients seems to be decreasing. Observational studies and an exploratory randomized controlled trial suggest that early enteral nutrition may be effective in preventing gastrointestinal bleeding in patients who are not at high risk. Recent systemic reviews and meta-analyses indicate that proton pump inhibitors and H2 receptor antagonists are more effective than placebo in preventing clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, especially in high-risk and very high-risk patients, but do not reduce mortality. Although observational data suggested an association of proton pump inhibitors and H2 receptor antagonists with Clostridium difficile infection and pneumonia, this association was not confirmed in randomized controlled trials.

SUMMARY

The incidence of stress-induced clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients seems to have decreased over time. Even though stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients has been a research focus for decades, many questions remain unanswered, such as which groups of patients are likely to benefit and what pharmacologic agent is associated with the best benefit-to-harm ratio.

Major publications in the critical care pharmacotherapy literature: 2019

PURPOSE

To summarize selected meta-analyses and trials related to critical care pharmacotherapy published in 2019.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Critical Care Pharmacotherapy Literature Update (CCPLU) Group screened 36 journals monthly for impactful articles and reviewed 113 articles during 2019 according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria.

RESULTS

Articles with a 1A grade, including three clinical practice guidelines, six meta-analyses, and five original research trials are reviewed here from those included in the monthly CCPLU. Clinical practice guidelines on the use of polymyxins and antiarrhythmic drugs in cardiac arrest as well as meta-analyses on antipsychotic use in delirium, stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP), and vasoactive medications in septic shock and cardiac arrest were summarized. Original research trials evaluated delirium, sedation, neuromuscular blockade, SUP, anticoagulation reversal, and hemostasis.

CONCLUSION

This clinical review and expert opinion provides summary and perspectives of clinical practice impact on influential critical care pharmacotherapy publications in 2019.

Prophylactic use of acid suppressants in adult acutely ill hospitalised patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Acutely ill patients are at risk of stress-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and prophylactic acid suppressants are frequently used. In this systematic review, we assessed the effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) versus placebo or no prophylaxis in acutely ill hospitalised patients.

METHODS

We conducted the review according to the PRISMA statement, the Cochrane Handbook and GRADE, using conventional meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, clinically important GI bleeding and serious adverse events (SAEs). The primary analyses included overall low risk of bias trials.

RESULTS

We included 65 comparisons from 62 trials (n = 9713); 43 comparisons were from intensive care units. Only three trials (n = 3596) had overall low risk of bias. We did not find an effect on all-cause mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.14; TSA-adjusted CI 0.90 to 1.18; high certainty). The rate of clinically important GI bleeding was lower with SUP (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89; TSA-adjusted CI 0.14 to 2.81; moderate certainty). We did not find a difference in pneumonia rates (moderate certainty). Effects on SAEs, Clostridium difficile enteritis, myocardial ischaemia and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were inconclusive due to sparse data. Analyses of all trials regardless of risk of bias were consistent with the primary analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not observe a difference in all-cause mortality or pneumonia with SUP. The incidence of clinically important GI bleeding was reduced with SUP, whereas any effects on SAEs, myocardial ischaemia, Clostridium difficile enteritis and HRQoL were inconclusive.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42017055676; published study protocol: Marker, et al 2017 in Systematic Reviews.

Population enrichment for critical care trials: phenotypes and differential outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are two heterogenous acute illnesses where numerous RCTs have indeterminate results. We present a narrative review on the recent developments in enriching patient populations for future sepsis and ARDS trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many researchers are actively pursuing enrichment strategies to reduce heterogeneity to increase the sensitivity of future trials. Enrichment refers to the use of measurable patient characteristics, known before randomisation, to refine trial populations. Biomarkers could increase the diagnostic certainty of sepsis, whereas chest radiology training to enhance reliability of interpretation and stabilisation period of mechanical ventilation have been considered to increase the diagnostic certainty of ARDS. Clinical and biomarker data analyses identifies four to six sepsis clinical phenotypes and two ARDS clinical phenotypes. Similarly, leukocyte gene expression data identifies two to four sepsis molecular phenotypes. Use of a test-dose identifies ARDS subpopulations who are likely to benefit from higher PEEP. Early-phase trials report how a biomarker that is altered by the intervention, such as lymphocyte count for recombinant interleukin-7 therapy and higher check point inhibitor expression for anti-check point treatments in sepsis, could identify a higher treatment effect population for future trials.

SUMMARY

Enrichment reduces heterogeneity and will enhance the sensitivity of future trials. However, enrichment, even when it identifies more homogenous populations, may not be efficient to deploy in trials or clinical practice.

Contemporary strategies to improve clinical trial design for critical care research: insights from the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists Workshop

BACKGROUND

Conducting research in critically-ill patient populations is challenging, and most randomized trials of critically-ill patients have not achieved pre-specified statistical thresholds to conclude that the intervention being investigated was beneficial.

METHODS

In 2019, a diverse group of patient representatives, regulators from the USA and European Union, federal grant managers, industry representatives, clinical trialists, epidemiologists, and clinicians convened the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists (3CT) Workshop to discuss challenges and opportunities in conducting and assessing critical care trials. Herein, we present the advantages and disadvantages of available methodologies for clinical trial design, conduct, and analysis, and a series of recommendations to potentially improve future trials in critical care.

CONCLUSION

The 3CT Workshop participants identified opportunities to improve critical care trials using strategies to optimize sample size calculations, account for patient and disease heterogeneity, increase the efficiency of trial conduct, maximize the use of trial data, and to refine and standardize the collection of patient-centered and patient-informed outcome measures beyond mortality.

Effect of Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis With Proton Pump Inhibitors vs Histamine-2 Receptor Blockers on In-Hospital Mortality Among ICU Patients Receiving Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: The PEPTIC Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2 receptor blockers (H2RBs) are often prescribed for patients as stress ulcer prophylaxis drugs in the intensive care unit (ICU). The comparative effect of these drugs on mortality is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare in-hospital mortality rates using PPIs vs H2RBs for stress ulcer prophylaxis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cluster crossover randomized clinical trial conducted at 50 ICUs in 5 countries between August 2016 and January 2019. Patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation within 24 hours of ICU admission were followed up for 90 days at the hospital.

INTERVENTIONS

Two stress ulcer prophylaxis strategies were compared (preferential use with PPIs vs preferential use with H2RBs). Each ICU used each strategy sequentially for 6 months in random order; 25 ICUs were randomized to the sequence with use of PPIs and then use of H2RBs and 25 ICUs were randomized to the sequence with use of H2RBs and then use of PPIs (13 436 patients randomized by site to PPIs and 13 392 randomized by site to H2RBs).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 90 days during index hospitalization. Secondary outcomes were clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding, Clostridioides difficile infection, and ICU and hospital lengths of stay.

RESULTS

Among 26 982 patients who were randomized, 154 opted out, and 26 828 were analyzed (mean [SD] age, 58 [17.0] years; 9691 [36.1%] were women). There were 26 771 patients (99.2%) included in the mortality analysis; 2459 of 13 415 patients (18.3%) in the PPI group died at the hospital by day 90 and 2333 of 13 356 patients (17.5%) in the H2RB group died at the hospital by day 90 (risk ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.10]; absolute risk difference, 0.93 percentage points [95% CI, -0.01 to 1.88] percentage points; P = .054). An estimated 4.1% of patients randomized by ICU site to PPIs actually received H2RBs and an estimated 20.1% of patients randomized by ICU site to H2RBs actually received PPIs. Clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 1.3% of the PPI group and 1.8% of the H2RB group (risk ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.92]; absolute risk difference, -0.51 percentage points [95% CI, -0.90 to -0.12 percentage points]; P = .009). Rates of Clostridioides difficile infection and ICU and hospital lengths of stay were not significantly different by treatment group. One adverse event (an allergic reaction) was reported in 1 patient in the PPI group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation, a strategy of stress ulcer prophylaxis with use of proton pump inhibitors vs histamine-2 receptor blockers resulted in hospital mortality rates of 18.3% vs 17.5%, respectively, a difference that did not reach the significance threshold. However, study interpretation may be limited by crossover in the use of the assigned medication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12616000481471.

Pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding-1-year mortality in the SUP-ICU trial

BACKGROUND

The long-term effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis with pantoprazole are unknown in ICU patients. We report 1-year mortality outcome in the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP-ICU) trial.

METHODS

In the SUP-ICU trial, acutely admitted adult ICU patients at risk of gastrointestinal bleeding were randomised to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg vs placebo (saline) once daily during their ICU stay. We assessed mortality at 1 year and did sensitivity analyses according to the trial protocol and statistical analysis plan.

RESULTS

A total of 3261 of the 3291 patients with available data (99.1%) were followed up at 1 year after randomisation; 1635 were allocated to pantoprazole and 1626 to placebo. At 1 year after randomisation, 610 of 1635 patients (37.3%) had died in the pantoprazole group as compared with 601 of 1626 (37.0%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.01; 95% confidence interval 0.92-1.10). The results were consistent in the sensitivity analysis adjusted for baseline risk factors and in those of the per-protocol population. We did not observe heterogeneity in the effect of pantoprazole vs placebo on 1-year mortality in the predefined subgroups, that is, patients with and without shock, mechanical ventilation, liver disease, coagulopathy, high disease severity (SAPS II > 53) or in medical vs surgical ICU patients.

CONCLUSION

We did not observe a difference in 1-year mortality among acutely admitted adult ICU patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding allocated to stress ulcer prophylaxis with pantoprazole or placebo during the ICU stay. (The SUP-ICU trial was funded by Innovation Fund Denmark and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02467621).

Heterogeneity of treatment effect of stress ulcer prophylaxis in ICU patients: A secondary analysis protocol

BACKGROUND

In the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP-ICU) trial, 3291 adult ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding were randomly allocated to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg or placebo once daily in the ICU. No difference was observed between the groups in the primary outcome 90-day mortality or the secondary outcomes, except for clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding. However, heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) not detected by conventional subgroup analyses could be present.

METHODS

This is a protocol and statistical analysis plan for a secondary, post hoc, exploratory analysis of the SUP-ICU trial. We will explore HTE in one set of subgroups based on severity of illness (using the Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] II) and another set of subgroups based on the total number of risk factors for GI bleeding in each patient using Bayesian hierarchical models. We will summarise posterior probability distributions using medians and 95% credible intervals and present probabilities for different levels of benefit and harm of the intervention in each subgroup. Finally, we will assess if the treatment effect interacts with SAPS II and the number of risk factors separately on the continuous scale using marginal effects plots.

CONCLUSIONS

The outlined post hoc analysis will explore whether HTE was present in the SUP-ICU trial and may help answer some of the remaining questions regarding the balance between benefits and harms of pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk of GI bleeding. CLINICALTRIALS.

GOV REGISTRATION

NCT02467621.