Drug Interaction Between Clopidogrel and Ranitidine or Omeprazole in Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Double-Blind, Double Dummy, Randomized Study

Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonists in the Treatment and Prevention of Heart Failure

Despite advancements in the treatment of heart failure (HF) and modest improvements in survival rates over the past few decades, mortality rate remains significantly high. HF not only imposes a significant economic burden on patients' families but also presents a substantial challenge to society at large. Therefore, effective treatment and prevention strategies are crucial. Numerous studies have demonstrated that histamine H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) can benefit patients with HF through various mechanisms. These mechanisms encompass promoting sodium and water excretion, vasodilation, enhancing cardiac output, reducing levels of inflammatory cytokines, improving ventricular remodeling, and reducing mortality rate. Additionally, H2RAs exert beneficial effects on typical risk factors and may prevent the onset of HF. This review aims to elucidate the mechanisms underlying the treatment and prevention of HF using H2RAs. For patients requiring either prevention or management of HF, and who concurrently have acid-related diseases, H2RAs may represent a suitable therapeutic option.

The benefit of omeprazole exposure on all-cause mortality and length of ICU/hospital stay might vary with age in critically ill pediatric patients: A cohort study

PURPOSE

To investigate the association between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) administration during hospitalization and mortality and length of stay in critically ill pediatric patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective observational cohort study on pediatric ICU patients (0 to 18 years). Propensity score matching (PSM), Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazards model and Linear regression model was applied for assessing the effects of PPIs on mortality and other outcomes during hospitalization.

RESULTS

A total of 2269 pediatric ICU patients were included, involving 1378 omeprazole (OME) users and 891 non-OME users. The results showed significant association between OME exposure and decreased ICU stay (β -0.042; 95% CI -0.073--0.011; P = 0.008) but prolonged non-ICU hospital stay (β 0.121; 95% CI 0.097-0.155; P = 0.040). No statistical significance was observed between OME exposure and reduced mortality, but the OME group had a slightly decreased tendency in 28-day mortality (HR 0.701; 95% CI 0.418-1.176) and in-hospital mortality (HR 0.726; 95% CI 0.419-1.257). Furthermore, subgroup analyses revealed that the decreased tendency of mortality were more obvious in patients less than 1 year old compared with older pediatric patients, although not statistically significant. In addition, we also observed that OME exposure was significantly associated with reduced mortality of general ICU subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided a sign that PPIs used only in the ICU, rather than throughout hospital stay, might provide more benefit for critically ill pediatric patients. Additionally, younger pediatric patients might gain relatively more benefit than older children when receiving PPIs.

Effects of exercise on platelet reactivity after myocardial infarction: a randomized clinical trial

Exercise training (ET) can lower platelet reactivity in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. However, the effects of ET on platelet reactivity in higher-risk patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of ET on platelet reactivity in patients with recent myocardial infarction (MI). Ninety patients were randomly assigned 1 month post-MI to the intervention (patients submitted to a supervised ET program) or control group. All patients were on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Platelet reactivity by VerifyNow-P2Y12 (measured by P2Y12 reaction units - PRUs) test was determined at baseline and at the end of 14 ± 2 weeks of follow-up at rest (primary endpoint), and multiplate electrode aggregometry (MEA) adenosine diphosphate (ADP) and aspirin (ASPI) tests were performed immediately before and after the maximal cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) at the same time points (secondary endpoints). Sixty-five patients (mean age 58.9 ± 10 years; 73.8% men; 60% ST elevation MI) completed follow-up (control group, n = 31; intervention group, n = 34). At the end of the follow-up, the mean platelet reactivity was 172.8 ± 68.9 PRUs and 166.9 ± 65.1 PRUs for the control and intervention groups, respectively (p = .72). Platelet reactivity was significantly increased after the CPET compared to rest at the beginning and at the end of the 14-week follow-up (among the intervention groups) by the MEA-ADP and MEA-ASPI tests (p < .01 for all analyses). In post-MI patients on DAPT, 14 weeks of supervised ET did not reduce platelet reactivity. Moreover, platelet reactivity was increased after high-intensity exercise (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02958657; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02958657).

Proton pump inhibitors and gastroprotection in patients treated with antithrombotic drugs: A cardiologic point of view

Aspirin, other antiplatelet agents, and anticoagulant drugs are used across a wide spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. A concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed in these patients, as gastrointestinal complications are relatively frequent. On the other hand, a potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested in patients treated with PPIs; in particular, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection of clopidogrel, due to pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions through hepatic metabolism. Previously, the concomitant use of clopidogrel and omeprazole or esomeprazole has been discouraged. In contrast, it remains less known whether PPI use may affect the clinical efficacy of ticagrelor and prasugrel, new P2Y12 receptor antagonists. Current guidelines recommend PPI use in combination with antiplatelet treatment in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, PPIs could be recommended, even if their usefulness deserves further data. H. pylori infection should always be investigated and treated in patients with a history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication) treated with antithrombotic drugs. The present review summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread combined use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs, discussing consequent clinical implications.

Effects of ilaprazole on the steady-state pharmacodynamics of clopidogrel in healthy volunteers: An open-label randomized crossover study

Background: Previous studies have suggested that proton pump inhibitors could impair the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel. It is uncertain whether ilaprazole affects the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel. This study aimed to determine the drug-drug interaction between ilaprazole and clopidogrel.

Methods: A randomized crossover trial of 40 healthy subjects was performed. Clopidogrel was administered alone or in combination with ilaprazole for 7 days. The maximal platelet aggregation (MPA) to 5 μmol/L adenosine diphosphate was measured by light transmission aggregometry and the platelet reactivity index (PRI) was determined by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein P2Y₁₂ assay. High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HOPR) was defined as a MPA of >40%. The inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) and PRI in the two phases were compared between two regimens after the last dosing.

Results: IPA was comparable between the two regimens at 0, 10 and 24 h (p > 0.05), but higher at 4 h in the clopidogrel alone regimen compared with that in the combined treatment regimen (75.66 ± 18.44% vs. 70.18 ± 17.67%, p = 0.031). The inhibition of PRI was comparable between the two regimens at 0 and 24 h. There were no significant differences in the area under the time-IPA% curve (AUC) or the incidence of HOPR at all time-points between the two regimens.

Conclusion: In healthy subjects, ilaprazole has limited effect on the pharmacodynamics of clopidogrel and it may not be clinically relevant.

Clinical Trial Registration: [www.chictr.org.cn], identifier [ChiCTR2000031482].

Drug-Drug Interactions With Over-The-Counter Medicines: Mind the Unprescribed

BACKGROUND

This review provides a summary of the currently available clinical data on drug-drug interactions (DDIs) involving over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. It aims to educate and increase awareness among health care providers and to support decisions in daily practice.

METHODS

An extensive literature search was performed using bibliographic databases available through PubMed.gov. An initial structured search was performed using the keywords "drug-drug-interaction AND (over-the-counter OR OTC)," without further restrictions except for the language. The initial results were screened for all described DDIs involving OTC drugs, and further information was gathered specifically on these drugs using dedicated database searches and references found in the bibliography from the initial hits.

RESULTS

From more than 1200 initial hits (1972-June 2021), 408 relevant publications were screened for DDIs involving OTC drugs, leading to 2 major findings: first, certain types of drug regimens are more prone to DDIs or have more serious DDI-related consequences, such as antiretroviral, anti-infective, and oral anticancer therapies. Second, although most DDIs involve OTC drugs as the perpetrators, some prescription drugs (statins or phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors) that currently have OTC status can be identified as the victims in DDIs. The following groups were identified to be frequently involved in DDIs: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, food supplements, antacids, proton-pump inhibitors, H2 antihistamines, laxatives, antidiarrheal drugs, and herbal drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

The most significant finding was the lack of high-quality evidence for commonly acknowledged interactions. High-quality interaction studies involving different phenotypes in drug metabolism (cytochrome P450) and distribution (transporters) are urgently needed. This should include modern and critical drugs, such as oral anticancer medications and direct oral anticoagulants.

Proton Pump Inhibitors Versus Histamine-2-Receptor Antagonists for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients: A Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

GOALS AND BACKGROUND

Stress ulcer prophylaxis has been shown to lower gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) rates. Various agents have been studied, and the optimal strategy continues to be contested. This study evaluates the efficacy between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2-receptor antagonists. Small sample sizes and methodology flaws limited prior studies.

STUDY

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials reporting the use of PPI and histamine-2-receptor antagonist reporting rates of GIB and standardized intensive care outcomes. Risk ratios (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A trial sequential analysis was performed to guard against errors.

RESULTS

A total of 14 randomized controlled trials of 28,526 patients with a mean age of 57.83±17.35 years and 30.82% females. In our pooled analysis, PPI outperformed its comparator (RR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.57-0.82) in clinically significant GIB. PPI re-demonstrated significant reduction in overt GIB (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39-0.97). No differences between groups was noted toward all-cause mortality (RR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.00-1.10) or incidence of pneumonia (RR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.82-1.51). Duration of stay (SMD: 0.07; 95% CI: -0.04-0.17) and ventilator days (SMD: 0.01; 95% CI: -0.01-0.04) were indifferent between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among critically ill patients, PPI was associated with reduced clinically significant or overt GIB. No differences in pneumonia were seen with the use of either agent. Trial sequential analysis for clinically significant GIB ruled out the risk for false-positive results, and thereby it is unlikely that future trials will affect our conclusions.

Omeprazole-clopidogrel interaction and neurovascular complications after flow-diverter device placement

BACKGROUND

Omeprazole is a common proton pump inhibitor that interferes with the hepatic activation of clopidogrel and potentially reduces its platelet-inhibitory effect. Omeprazole has been shown to increase P2Y₁₂ levels and adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients treated with drug-eluting stents. However, omeprazole use among patients treated with flow-diverting stents for intracranial aneurysms has not been evaluated.

METHODS

All patients with placement of a flow-diverting device for treatment of an intracranial aneurysm at a tertiary institution from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, were retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria included documented clopidogrel administration, available P2Y₁₂ levels, and thorough documentation of administration of other medications, including omeprazole.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen patients (12%) were receiving omeprazole and clopidogrel at treatment. P2Y₁₂ reactivity was significantly greater in the omeprazole cohort (mean P2Y₁₂ level, 250 P2Y₁₂ reaction units (PRU)) than in the control cohort (mean P2Y₁₂ level, 112PRU) (P<0.001). Furthermore, a greater proportion of patients had a P2Y₁₂ level >180 PRU in the omeprazole cohort (14 of 16 [88%] vs 24 of 122 [20%]; P<0.001; OR [95% CI], 29 [6-134]).

CONCLUSION

Omeprazole was associated with a significant increase in the mean P2Y₁₂ reactivity level among patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with flow-diverting devices who received clopidogrel. However, receipt of omeprazole was not associated with an increased risk of ischemic events or stent stenosis. For neuroendovascular patients who are treated with a flow diverter while receiving clopidogrel, alternative gastrointestinal medication regimens should be considered.

Gastroprotection in patients on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy: a position paper of National Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO) and the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists (AIGO)

Aspirin and P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists are widely used across the spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Gastrointestinal complications, including ulcer and bleeding, are relatively common during antiplatelet treatment and, therefore, concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed. However, potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested for PPIs, and, in recent years, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection by aspirin and, even more so, clopidogrel. Indeed, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies suggested an interaction through hepatic CYP2C19 between PPIs and clopidogrel, which could translate into clinical inefficacy, leading to higher rates of cardiovascular events. The FDA and the EMA sent a warning in 2010 discouraging the concomitant use of clopidogrel with omeprazole or esomeprazole. In addition, whether the use of PPIs may affect the clinical efficacy of the new P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists, ticagrelor and prasugrel, remains less known. According to current guidelines, PPIs in combination with antiplatelet treatment are recommended in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori infection. Like vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), DOACs can determine gastrointestinal bleeding. Results from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies suggest that high-dose dabigatran (150 mg bid), rivaroxaban and high-dose edoxaban (60 mg daily) are associated with a higher risk of GI bleeding as compared with apixaban and warfarin. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with GI risk factor, PPI could be recommended, even if usefulness of PPIs in these patients deserves further data. Helicobacter pylori should always be searched, and treated, in patients with history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication). Given the large number of patients treated with antithrombotic drugs and PPIs, even a minor reduction of platelet inhibition or anticoagulant effect potentially carries a considerable clinical impact. The present joint statement by ANMCO and AIGO summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs in combination. Moreover, it outlines evidence supporting or opposing drug interactions between these drugs and discusses consequent clinical implications.

Platelet Reactivity in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Awaiting Surgical Revascularization

BACKGROUND

Dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended for patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Approximately 10% to 15% of these patients will undergo coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery for index events, and current guidelines recommend stopping clopidogrel at least 5 days before CABG. This waiting time has clinical and economic implications.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate if a platelet reactivity-based strategy is noninferior to standard of care for 24-h post-CABG bleeding.

METHODS

In this randomized, open label noninferiority trial, 190 patients admitted with ACS with indications for CABG and on aspirin and P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors, were assigned to either control group, P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor withdrawn 5 to 7 days before CABG, or intervention group, daily measurements of platelet reactivity by Multiplate analyzer (Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Vienna, Austria) with CABG planned the next working day after platelet reactivity normalization (pre-defined as ≥46 aggregation units).

RESULTS

Within the first 24 h of CABG, the median chest tube drainage was 350 ml (interquartile range [IQR]: 250 to 475 ml) and 350 ml (IQR: 255 to 500 ml) in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p for noninferiority <0.001). The median waiting period between the decision to undergo CABG and the procedure was 112 h (IQR: 66 to 142 h) and 136 h (IQR: 112 to 161 h) (p < 0.001), respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, a 6.4% decrease in the median in-hospital expenses was observed in the intervention group (p = 0.014), with 11.2% decrease in the analysis per protocol (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

A strategy based on platelet reactivity-guided is noninferior to the standard of care in patients with ACS awaiting CABG regarding peri-operative bleeding, significantly shortens the waiting time to CABG, and decreases hospital expenses. (Evaluation of Platelet Aggregability in the Release of CABG in Patients With ACS With DAPT; NCT02516267).

Mechanisms of CYP450 Inhibition: Understanding Drug-Drug Interactions Due to Mechanism-Based Inhibition in Clinical Practice

In an ageing society, polypharmacy has become a major public health and economic issue. Overuse of medications, especially in patients with chronic diseases, carries major health risks. One common consequence of polypharmacy is the increased emergence of adverse drug events, mainly from drug–drug interactions. The majority of currently available drugs are metabolized by CYP450 enzymes. Interactions due to shared CYP450-mediated metabolic pathways for two or more drugs are frequent, especially through reversible or irreversible CYP450 inhibition. The magnitude of these interactions depends on several factors, including varying affinity and concentration of substrates, time delay between the administration of the drugs, and mechanisms of CYP450 inhibition. Various types of CYP450 inhibition (competitive, non-competitive, mechanism-based) have been observed clinically, and interactions of these types require a distinct clinical management strategy. This review focuses on mechanism-based inhibition, which occurs when a substrate forms a reactive intermediate, creating a stable enzyme–intermediate complex that irreversibly reduces enzyme activity. This type of inhibition can cause interactions with drugs such as omeprazole, paroxetine, macrolide antibiotics, or mirabegron. A good understanding of mechanism-based inhibition and proper clinical management is needed by clinicians when such drugs are prescribed. It is important to recognize mechanism-based inhibition since it cannot be prevented by separating the time of administration of the interacting drugs. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of the different types of mechanism-based inhibition, along with illustrative examples of how mechanism-based inhibition might affect prescribing and clinical behaviors.

Changes in prescribed medicines in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in general practice

Background

Treatment complexity rises in line with the number of drugs, single doses, and administration methods, thereby threatening patient adherence. Patients with multimorbidity often need flexible, individualised treatment regimens, but alterations during the course of treatment may further increase complexity. The objective of our study was to explore medication changes in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in general practice.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed data from the cluster-randomised PRIMUM trial (PRIoritisation of MUltimedication in Multimorbidity) conducted in 72 general practices. We developed an algorithm for active pharmaceutical ingredients (API), strength, dosage, and administration method to assess changes in physician-reported medication data during two intervals (baseline to six-months: ∆₁; six- to nine-months: ∆₂), analysed them descriptively at prescription and patient levels, and checked for intervention effects.

Results

Of 502 patients (median age 72 years, 52% female), 464 completed the study. Changes occurred in 98.6% of patients (changes were 19% more likely in the intervention group): API changes during ∆₁ and ∆₂ occurred in 414 (82.5%) and 338 (67.3%) of patients, dosage alterations in 372 (74.1%) and 296 (59.2%), and changes in API strength in 158 (31.5%) and 138 (27.5%) respectively. Administration method changed in 79 (16%) of patients in both ∆₁ and ∆₂. Simvastatin, metformin and aspirin were most frequently subject to alterations.

Conclusion

Medication regimens in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy changed frequently. These are mostly due to discontinuations and dosage alterations, followed by additions and restarts. These findings cast doubt on the effectiveness of cross-sectional assessments of medication and support longitudinal assessments where possible.

Trial registration.

1. Prospective registration: Trial registration number: NCT01171339; Name of registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Date of registration: July 27, 2010; Date of enrolment of the first participant to the trial: August 12, 2010.

2. Peer reviewed trial registration: Trial registration number: ISRCTN99526053; Name of registry: Controlled Trials; Date of registration: August 31, 2010; Date of enrolment of the first participant to the trial: August 12, 2010.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-018-0825-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Gastroenterological Perspectives on Acute Cardiac Care — the Management of Patients with Implanted Coronary Stents Following an Acute Coronary Syndrome

Cardiovascular and digestive diseases frequently share the same risk factors such as obesity, unhealthy diet, or several social behaviors, and the increasing prevalence of patients with overlapped cardiovascular and digestive symptoms is a challenging problem in the daily practice. Patients with gastro-esophageal reflux disease can exhibit various forms of chest pain that can be very similar to angina. Furthermore, antithrombotic therapies used for preventive or curative purposes in patients with cardiovascular diseases are frequently associated with gastrointestinal side effects including bleeding. At the same time, in patients with coronary stents presenting to the emergency department with chest pain, angina triggered by stent thrombosis or restenosis should be differentiated from angina-like symptoms caused by a gastrointestinal disease. The aim of this review was to present the complex inter-relation between gastroesophageal diseases and angina in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy following an acute coronary syndrome, with a particular emphasis on the role of anemia resulting from occult or manifest gastrointestinal bleeding, as a precipitating factor for triggering or aggravating angina.

Pantoprazole Does Not Reduce the Antiplatelet Effect of Clopidogrel: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Korea

Background/Aims

Concerns that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) diminish the efficacy of clopidogrel could hamper the appropriate prescription of PPIs. We evaluated the influence of pantoprazole on the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel compared with ranitidine, which is regarded as safe, after stratification of the population according to the presence of a cytochrome (CYP) 2C19 polymorphism in Korea.

Methods

Forty patients who underwent dual antiplatelet therapy were randomized to receive pantoprazole (n=20) or ranitidine (n=20). Platelet aggregation was evaluated by impedance aggregometry at baseline (D0) and 8 days after acid-lowering treatments (D9). CYP2C19 was genotyped by polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism.

Results

After co-treatment, the percentage of clopidogrel low-response was 11.1% (2/18) in the pantoprazole group and 10.5% (2/19) in the ranitidine group (p=0.954). The impedance values with adenosine diphosphate stimulus after acid-lowering treatments did not significantly differ between the two groups. In a multiple regression analysis, only ST-elevation myocardial infarction was marginally associated with a reduced antiplatelet effect (odds ratio, 12.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.84 to 173.78). However, pantoprazole use did not affect the antiplatelet effect after correction for the CYP2C19 polymorphism.

Conclusions

This study showed that pantoprazole does not increase platelet aggregation in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02733640).

Comparison of prophylactic effect of UGIB and effects on platelet function between PPIs and H2RAs combined with DAPT: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

We compared prophylactic effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H₂RAs) on upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) associated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and explored this influence on platelet function.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing PPIs with H₂RAs in adults receiving DAPT were collected from PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. Dichotomous data were pooled to obtain risk ratios (RRs) for UGIB, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), poor responders to clopidogrel and rehospitalization, and continuous data were pooled to obtain mean differences (MDs) for P2Y₁₂ reaction units (PRUs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Twelve clinical trials (n=3,301) met the inclusion criteria. Compared to H₂RAs, PPIs lessened UGIB (RR =0.16, 95% CI: 0.03–0.70), and there was no significant difference in the incidence of PRUs (MD =18.21 PRUs, 95% CI: −4.11–40.54), poor responders to clopidogrel (RR =1.21, 95% CI: 0.92–1.61), incidence of MACEs (RR =0.89, 95% CI: 0.45–1.75) or rehospitalization (RR =1.76, 95% CI: 0.79–3.92). Subgroup analysis confirmed fewer PRUs in the H₂RAs group compared to the omeprazole group (2 studies, n=189, MD =31.80 PRUs, 95% CI: 11.65–51.96). However, poor responder data for clopidogrel and MACEs might be unreliable because few studies of this kind were included.

Conclusion

Limited evidence indicates that PPIs were better than H₂RAs for prophylaxis of UGIB associated with DAPT and had no effect on platelet function. Further study is needed to confirm these observations.