Somatostatin inhibits gastric acid secretion more effectively than pantoprazole in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding: a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated prior to endoscopic diagnosis in upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common reason for emergency hospital admission. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduce gastric acid production and are used to manage upper GI bleeding. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the clinical efficacy of proton pump inhibitors initiated before endoscopy in people with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of PPI treatment initiated prior to endoscopy in people with acute upper GI bleeding.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and major conference proceedings to October 2008, for the previous versions of this review, and in April 2018, October 2019, and 3 June 2021 for this update. We also contacted experts in the field and searched trial registries and references of trials for any additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared treatment with a PPI (oral or intravenous) versus control treatment with either placebo, histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) or no treatment, prior to endoscopy in hospitalised people with uninvestigated upper GI bleeding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted study data and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes assessed at 30 days were: mortality (our primary outcome), rebleeding, surgery, high-risk stigmata of recent haemorrhage (active bleeding, non-bleeding visible vessel or adherent clot) at index endoscopy, endoscopic haemostatic treatment at index endoscopy, time to discharge, blood transfusion requirements and adverse effects. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs comprising 2223 participants. No new studies have been published after the literature search performed in 2008 for the previous version of this review. Of the included studies, we considered one to be at low risk of bias, two to be at unclear risk of bias, and three at high risk of bias. Our meta-analyses suggest that pre-endoscopic PPI use may not reduce mortality (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.70; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence), and may reduce rebleeding (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.06; 5 studies; low-certainty evidence). In addition, pre-endoscopic PPI use may not reduce the need for surgery (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.26; 6 studies; low-certainty evidence), and may not reduce the proportion of participants with high-risk stigmata of recent haemorrhage at index endoscopy (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.21; 4 studies; low-certainty evidence). Pre-endoscopic PPI use likely reduces the need for endoscopic haemostatic treatment at index endoscopy (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.93; 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). There were insufficient data to determine the effect of pre-endoscopic PPI use on blood transfusions (2 studies; meta-analysis not possible; very low-certainty evidence) and time to discharge (1 study; very low-certainty evidence). There was no substantial heterogeneity amongst trials in any analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that PPI treatment initiated before endoscopy for upper GI bleeding likely reduces the requirement for endoscopic haemostatic treatment at index endoscopy. However, there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether pre-endoscopic PPI treatment increases, reduces or has no effect on other clinical outcomes, including mortality, rebleeding and need for surgery. Further well-designed RCTs that conform to current standards for endoscopic haemostatic treatment and appropriate co-interventions, and that ensure high-dose PPIs are only given to people who received endoscopic haemostatic treatment, regardless of initial randomisation, are warranted. However, as it may be unrealistic to achieve the optimal information size, pragmatic multicentre trials may provide valuable evidence on this topic.

Progress in new hemostasis techniques for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is one of the most common acute and critical illnesses in the emergency department. It mainly refers to gastrointestinal bleeding above the Treitz ligament, and the mortality rate is about 2%-10%. The main clinical manifestations are hematemesis and/or hematochezia. The diagnosis is mainly based on clinical manifestations combined with laboratory and imaging findings. Due to the rapid onset and severe nature of the condition, there are various treatment methods according to different causes. This article reviews the diagnosis and treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Management of Bleeding Gastric Varices: Expert Review

Management of bleeding gastric varices (GV) presents a unique challenge for patients with portal hypertension. Despite over thirty years of diagnostic and treatment advances standardized practices for bleeding GV are lacking and unsupported by adequate evidence. There are no definitive natural history studies to help with risk assessment or prospective clinical trials to guide clinical decision making. Available literature on the natural history and management of gastric varices consists of case series, restricted cohort studies, and a few small randomized trials, all of which have significant selection biases. This review summarizes the available data and recommendations based on expert opinion on how best to diagnose and manage bleeding from gastric varices. Table 1 summarizes our recommendations.

The effect of somatostatin analogs and acromegaly on the upper gastrointestinal system

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of somatostatin analogs and disease activity status on the upper gastrointestinal system in patients with acromegaly.

METHODS

One hundred eighty-one patients with acromegaly were retrospectively assessed. The demographic, biochemical, pathologic, and radiologic data of the patients were evaluated. The upper gastrointestinal endoscopies and endoscopic biopsies were investigated. We divided patients into four groups according to the use of somatostatin analogs, and into two groups according to disease activity. We compared the data of patients between groups A, B, C, and D, and controlled/uncontrolled groups separately.

RESULTS

Before and in the peri-endoscopic period, 67 and 27 patients were being treated with octreotide long-acting release (LAR) (group A) and lanreotide autogel (group B), respectively. Twenty-one patients used somatostatin analogs, but they were stopped for various reasons before upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (group C), and 66 patients did not use a somatostatin analog (group D). In the peri-endoscopic period, 103 (60%) patients were responsive to medical and/or surgical treatment and 67 (40%) patients were non-responsive. The rate of gastritis was higher in group A than in groups B and D. The incidence of duodenitis and gastric ulcer was much higher in group D. The rate of gastritis was higher in the controlled group compared to the uncontrolled group.

CONCLUSION

The study showed that octreotide LAR treatment could be a risk factor in addition to known factors for the development of gastritis in patients with acromegaly.

The Effect of Octreotide in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Objective:

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NUGIB) is a common cause of hospitalization and is associated with considerable mortality and morbidity. Octreotide has been shown to be an effective treatment in the control of variceal UGIB. Theoretically, octreotide could be effective in the treatment of other types of bleeding ulcers.

Methods:

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was carried out on patients with NVUGIB who had been admitted to two referral centers in Shiraz, Iran. Patients were randomized to two groups: Group A (n = 58) received octreotide and Group B (n = 58) received a placebo. Patients in both groups received pantoprazole 40 mg as an initial dose, then 40 mg every 12 h intravenously. In addition to the pantoprazole, patients in Group A received 100 μg octreotide subcutaneously every 8 h for 72 h or until they were discharged. Patients in Group B received pantoprazole and a placebo at the same dose schedule.

Findings:

There were no statistically significant differences between Groups A and B in terms of mortality (0 vs. 5.17%; P = 0.21,) rebleeding rate (5.17% vs. 1.72%; P = 0.5), blood transfusion requirement (1.65 ± 0.47 units vs. 1.70 ± 0.45 units; P = 0.45), length of hospital stay (1.96 ± 1.00 days vs. 1.65 ± 0.84 days; P = 0.44), and need for surgery (1.72% vs. 1.72%; P = 0.7).

Conclusion:

The results showed that use of subcutaneous octreotide as an adjuvant treatment did not have a beneficial effect on the treatment of NVUGIB.

Management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency, with a reported mortality of 2-10%. Patients identified as being at very low risk of either needing an intervention or death can be managed as outpatients. For all other patients, intravenous fluids as needed for resuscitation and red cell transfusion at a hemoglobin threshold of 70-80 g/L are recommended. After resuscitation is initiated, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and the prokinetic agent erythromycin may be administered, with antibiotics and vasoactive drugs recommended in patients who have cirrhosis. Endoscopy should be undertaken within 24 hours, with earlier endoscopy considered after resuscitation in patients at high risk, such as those with hemodynamic instability. Endoscopic treatment is used for variceal bleeding (for example, ligation for esophageal varices and tissue glue for gastric varices) and for high risk non-variceal bleeding (for example, injection, thermal probes, or clips for lesions with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessel). Patients who require endoscopic therapy for ulcer bleeding should receive high dose proton pump inhibitors after endoscopy, whereas those who have variceal bleeding should continue taking antibiotics and vasoactive drugs. Recurrent ulcer bleeding is treated with repeat endoscopic therapy, with subsequent bleeding managed by interventional radiology or surgery. Recurrent variceal bleeding is generally treated with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. In patients who require antithrombotic agents, outcomes appear to be better when these drugs are reintroduced early.

1-Deoxynojirimycin (DNJ) Ameliorates Indomethacin-Induced Gastric Ulcer in Mice by Affecting NF-kappaB Signaling Pathway

Gastric ulcer (GU) is a main threat to public health. 1-Deoxynojirimycin (DNJ) has antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties and may prevent GU but related mechanism remains unclear. DNJ was extracted from the supernatants of Bacillus subtilis by using ethanol and purified by using CM-Sepharose chromatography. A GU mouse model was induced by indomethacin. The functional role of DNJ in GU mice was explored by measuring the main molecules in the NF-KappaB pathway. After the model establishment, 40 GU mice were evenly assigned into five categories: IG (received vehicle control), LG (10 μg DNJ daily), MG (20 μg DNJ daily), HG (40 μg DNJ daily), and RG (0.5 mg ranitidine daily). Meanwhile, eight healthy mice were assigned as a control group (CG). After 1-month therapy, weight and gastric volume were investigated. The levels of serum inflammatory cytokines (IL-6 and TNF-α), antioxidant indices [superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), and reduced glutathione (GSH)], and oxidant biomarker malondialdehyde (MDA) were examined via ELISA. Meanwhile, inflammatory cytokine (IL-6 and TNF-α) levels, and key molecules (NF-κB p65), cyclooxygenase 1 (COX-1 and COX2) involved in NF-κB pathway, were analyzed by using Western Blot. COX-1 and COX-2 levels were further measured by immunohistochemistry. The effects of DNJ on gastric functions were explored by measuring the changes of Motilin (MOT), Substance P (SP), Somatostatin (SS), and Vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) in GU mouse models with ELISA Kits. The results indicated that DNJ prevented indomethacin-caused increase of gastric volume. DNJ improved histopathology of GU mice when compared with the mice from IG group (P < 0.05). DNJ consumption decreased the levels of IL-6 and TNF-α (P < 0.05). DNJ increased antioxidant indices of GU mice by improving the activities of SOD, CAT and reduced GSH, and reduced MDA levels (P < 0.05). DNJ increased the levels of prostaglandin E2, COX-1, COX2, and reduced the levels of and NF-κB p65 (P < 0.05). DNJ showed protection for gastric functions of GU mice by reducing the levels of MOT and SP, and increasing the levels of SS and VIP. DNJ treatment inactivates NF-κB signaling pathway, and increases anti-ulceration ability of the models.

Should Vasoconstrictors be Considered in a Cirrhotic Patient with Acute Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding?

Varices manifest as a major etiology of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with chronic liver diseases, such as liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. By contrast, non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding is rare. Pharmacological treatment differs between patients with variceal and non-variceal bleeding. Vasoconstrictors are recommended for the treatment of variceal bleeding, rather than non-variceal bleeding. In contrast, pump proton inhibitors are recommended for the treatment of non-variceal bleeding, rather than variceal bleeding. Herein, we present a case with liver cirrhosis and acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding who had a high risk of rebleeding (i.e., Child-Pugh class C, hepatocellular carcinoma, portal vein thrombosis, low albumin, and high international normalized ratio and D-dimer). As the source of bleeding was obscure, only terlipressin without pump proton inhibitors was initially administered. Acute bleeding episode was effectively controlled. After that, an elective endoscopic examination confirmed that the source of bleeding was attributed to peptic ulcer, rather than varices. Based on this preliminary case report, we further discussed the potential role of vasoconstrictors in a patient with cirrhosis with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Pantoprazole before Endoscopy in Patients with Gastroduodenal Ulcer Bleeding: Does the duration of Infusion and Ulcer Location Influence the Effects?

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of preemptive pantoprazole infusion on early endoscopic findings in patients with acute ulcer bleeding. Records of 333 patients admitted with acute ulcer bleeding were analyzed. Ulcer bleeders were given either 80 mg bolus of pantoprazole followed by continuous infusion of 8 mg per hour or saline infusion until endoscopy. In 93 patients saline infusion whereas in 240 patients bolus plus infusion of pantoprazole was administrated with mean (±SD) durations of 5.45 ± 12.9 hours and 6.9 ± 13.2 hours, respectively (P = 0.29). Actively bleeding ulcers were detected in 46/240 (19.2%) of cases in the pantoprazole group as compared with 23/93 (24.7%) in the saline infusion group (P = 0.26). Different durations of pantoprazole infusion (0–4 hours, >4 hours, and >6 hours) had no significant effect on endoscopic and clinical outcome parameters in duodenal ulcer bleeders. Gastric ulcer bleeders on pantoprazole infusion longer than 4 and 6 hours before endoscopy had actively bleeding ulcers in 4.3% and 5% compared to the 19.5% active bleeding rate in the saline group (P = 0.02 and P = 0.04). Preemptive infusion of high-dose pantoprazole longer than 4 hours before endoscopy decreased the ratio of active bleeding only in gastric but not in duodenal ulcer patients.

Somatostatin adjunctive therapy for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal rebleeding after endoscopic therapy

AIM: To evaluate the effect of pantoprazole with a somatostatin adjunct in patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB).

METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective database in a tertiary care university hospital. From October 2006 to October 2008, we enrolled 101 patients with NVUGIB that had a high-risk stigma on endoscopy. Within 24 h of hospital admission, all patients underwent endoscopic therapy. After successful endoscopic hemostasis, all patients received an 80-mg bolus of pantoprazole followed by continuous intravenous infusion (8 mg/h for 72 h). The somatostatin adjunct group (n = 49) also received a 250-μg bolus of somatostatin, followed by continuous infusion (250 μg/h for 72 h). Early rebleeding rates, disappearance of endoscopic stigma and risk factors associated with early rebleeding were examined.

RESULTS: Early rebleeding rates were not significantly different between treatment groups (12.2% vs 14.3%, P = 0.766). Disappearance of endoscopic stigma on the second endoscopy was not significantly different between treatment groups (94.2% vs 95.9%, P = 0.696). Multivariate analysis showed that the complete Rockall score was a significant risk factor for early rebleeding (P = 0.044, OR: 9.080, 95% CI: 1.062-77.595).

CONCLUSION: The adjunctive use of somatostatin was not superior to pantoprazole monotherapy after successful endoscopic hemostasis in patients with NVUGIB.

Proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated prior to endoscopic diagnosis in upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence regarding the clinical efficacy of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) initiated before endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of PPI treatment initiated before endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases and major conference proceedings to September 2005, using the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model. Searches were re-run in February 2006 and October 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of hospitalised participants with unselected upper gastrointestinal bleeding, undergoing active treatment with a proton pump inhibitor PPI (oral or intravenous) and control treatment with either placebo, histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) or no treatment prior to endoscopy. Outcomes were assessed at 30 days and included mortality, rebleeding and surgery. Also assessed were stigmata of recent haemorrhage (SRH; active bleeding, non bleeding visible vessel or adherent clot) at index endoscopy, length of hospital stay, blood transfusion requirements and requirement for endoscopic therapy at index endoscopy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors assessed eligibility criteria and extracted data regarding outcomes and factors affecting methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Six RCTs comprising 2223 participants were included. There was no statistical heterogeneity among trials for dichotomous outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality, rebleeding or surgery between PPI and control treatment. Unweighted pooled mortality rates were 6.1% and 5.5% respectively (odds ratio (OR)1.12; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.73). Unweighted pooled rebleeding rates were 13.9% and 16.6% respectively (OR 0.81; 95%CI 0.61 to 1.09). Pooled rates for surgery were 9.9% and 10.2% respectively (OR 0.96 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35). PPI treatment compared to control significantly reduced the proportion of participants with SRH at index endoscopy; unweighted pooled rates were 37.2% and 46.5% respectively (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.84). However, this result was not robust to sensitivity analysis. PPI treatment compared to control significantly reduced endoscopic therapy at index endoscopy; unweighted pooled rates were 8.6% and 11.7% respectively (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.93). For continuous outcomes (length of hospital stay and blood transfusion requirements), quantitative analysis could not be performed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPI treatment initiated before endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding might reduce the proportion of participants with SRH at index endoscopy and significantly reduces requirement for endoscopic therapy during index endoscopy. However, there is no evidence that PPI treatment affects clinically important outcomes, namely mortality, rebleeding or need for surgery.

Gastric acid inhibition in the treatment of peptic ulcer hemorrhage

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding from peptic ulcer disease is a common clinical event, resulting in considerable patient morbidity and significant health care costs. Inhibiting gastric acid secretion is a key component in improving clinical outcomes, including reducing rebleeding, transfusion requirements, and surgery. Raising intragastric pH promotes clot stability and reduces the influences of gastric acid and pepsin. Patients with high-risk stigmata for ulcer bleeding (arterial bleeding, nonbleeding visible vessels, and adherent clots) benefit significantly from and should receive high-dose intravenous proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) after successful endoscopic hemostasis. For patients with low-risk stigmata (flat spots or clean ulcer base), oral PPI therapy alone is sufficient. For oozing bleeding (an intermediate risk finding), successful endoscopic hemostasis and oral PPI are recommended. Using intravenous PPIs before endoscopy appears to reduce the frequency of finding high-risk stigmata on later endoscopy, but has not been shown to improve clinical outcomes. High-dose oral PPIs may be as effective as intravenous infusion in achieving positive clinical outcomes, but this has not been documented by randomized studies and its cost-effectiveness is unclear.

Treatment of intractable Mallory-Weiss syndrome with octreotide: a report of 24 cases

AIM: To observe the efficacy of octreotide in the treatment of intractable Mallory-Weiss syndrome (MWS).

METHODS: Forty-seven MWS patients who did not respond to routine treatment within 24 h were randomly divided into two groups: treatment group (n = 24) and control group (n = 23). Patients in the control group were given an intravenous infusion of 40 mg omeprazole, once every 12 hours, while those in the treatment group were given the same dose of omeprazole as well as continuous intravenous administration of octreotide via a micro pump at a constant speed of 25 μg/h for three days.

RESULTS: After treatment with octreotide, hemostasis was achieved in 17 (70.8%) patients. The overall response rate achieved in the treatment group was significantly higher than that in the control group (91.67% vs 73.91%, P < 0.01). Moreover, the hemostasis success rate in the treatment group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: Combined use of octerotide and omeprazole is more effective in the treatment of MWS patients who do not respond to routine treatment.

Intravenous pantoprazole as an adjuvant therapy following successful endoscopic treatment for peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND

Several studies have suggested that proton pump inhibitors are efficacious in preventing rebleeding when administered immediately after endoscopic treatments. However, there are limited clinical outcome data on the use of intravenous pantoprazole.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of intravenous pantoprazole after successful endoscopic treatment for peptic ulcer bleeding using evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and several Chinese databases up to July 2008 were searched. RCTs that compared the relative effectiveness of intravenous pantoprazole with placebo, H2 receptor antagonist or other agents for patients with peptic ulcer bleeding who were pretreated with successful endoscopic therapies were retrieved.

RESULTS

Five RCTs comprising a total of 821 participants were included in the final meta-analysis. Overall, there were significant differences in ulcer rebleeding (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.53; pooled rates were 4.7% for pantoprazole and 15.0% for control), surgical intervention (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.83; pooled rates were 1.4% in pantoprazole group versus 6.5% in control) and total length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference -1.53; 95% CI -1.91 to -1.16), but not on mortality (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.81; pooled mortality rates were 1.9% for pantoprazole versus 2.8% for control) and blood transfusion requirements (weighted mean difference -0.53; 95% CI for random effects -1.04 to -0.02) when compared with control treatments. A series of subgroup analyses supported the results from the main analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous administration of pantoprazole after endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcer bleeding reduces rates of ulcer rebleeding, surgical intervention and overall duration of hospital stay, but not mortality and blood transfusion requirements compared with placebo, H2 receptor antagonist or somatostatin.

High-dose pantoprazole continuous infusion is superior to somatostatin after endoscopic hemostasis in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND

The best antisecretory treatment after endoscopic hemostasis in patients with ulcer bleeding is still in quest.

OBJECTIVES

To compare pantoprazole and somatostatin continuous infusion after endoscopic hemostasis in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 164 consecutive patients with a bleeding peptic ulcer, after successful endoscopic hemostasis, were randomly assigned to receive, double blindly, continuous IV infusion of pantoprazole 8 mg/h for 48 h after a bolus of 40 mg (group P) or somatostatin 250 microg/h for 48 h after a bolus of 250 microg (group-S). Twenty-four-hour pH-metry was performed in the last 30 patients in each group. Endoscopy was performed, in case of bleeding nonrecurrence, every 48 h until disappearance of stigmata.

RESULTS

Bleeding recurrence: group S 14 patients (17%) versus group P 4 (5%) (P=0.046). In multivariate analysis, bleeding recurrence was 4.57 (CI 1.31-15.91) times more frequent in group S (P=0.02). There was no difference in the need for surgery and mortality. Acid suppression over pH 6: group S 82.9% of the time versus group P 81.5% (P=0.97). Acid suppression over pH 6 for >85% of the time: group S 14 (47%) patients versus group P 17 (57%) (P=0.44). Disappearance of endoscopic stigmata after 48 h: group S 25/68 patients (37%) versus group P 72/78 (92%) (P<0.0001). No major side effects identified in either study group.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with a bleeding ulcer, after successful endoscopic hemostasis, despite equipotent acid suppression, pantoprazole continuous infusion was superior to somatostatin to prevent bleeding recurrence and quick disappearance of the endoscopic stigmata. Nevertheless, no differences were seen in the need for surgery and mortality.

Proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated prior to endoscopic diagnosis in upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence regarding the clinical efficacy of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) initiated prior to endoscopy in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to systematically review evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that studied PPI treatment initiated before endoscopy in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A search was undertaken according to the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model using CENTRAL, (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases and major conference proceedings up to September 2005. The literature search was re-run in February 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Hospitalised patients with unselected upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Types of interventions: Active treatment with a PPI (oral or intravenous) and control treatment with either placebo or an histamine-(2) receptor antagonist (H(2)RA). Types of outcome measures: Assessed at 30 days: mortality, rebleeding and surgery. Also assessed were stigmata of recent haemorrhage at index endoscopy, length of hospital stay and blood transfusion requirements.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two reviewers assessed the eligibility criteria of each study and extracted data regarding outcomes and factors affecting methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Five RCTs were included for review. No further RCTS were identified in an updated literature search. Four trials comprising a total of 1512 patients in total reported data for all randomised patients. There was no statistical heterogeneity among trials for the outcomes of mortality, rebleeding and surgery. There were no statistically significant differences in rates of mortality, rebleeding or surgery between PPI and control treatment. Pooled mortality rates were 6.1% and 5.5% respectively (odds ratio (OR)1.12; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.73). Pooled rebleeding rates were 13.9% and 16.6% respectively (OR 0.81; 95%CI 0.61 to 1.09). Pooled rates for surgery were 9.9% and 10.2% respectively (OR 0.96 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35). PPI treatment compared to control significantly reduced the proportion of patients with stigmata of recent haemorrhage at index endoscopy; pooled rates were 37.2% and 46.5% respectively (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.84). For the continuous outcomes, namely length of hospital stay and blood transfusion requirements, quantitative analysis could not be performed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPI treatment initiated prior to endoscopy in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding significantly reduces the proportion of patients with stigmata of recent haemorrhage at index endoscopy. However, there is no evidence that PPI treatment affects clinically important outcomes, namely mortality, rebleeding or need for surgery.

Pro/con debate: octreotide has an important role in the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding of unknown origin?

Whether it is the primary reason for admission or a complication of critical illness, upper gastrointestinal bleeding is commonly encountered in the intensive care unit. In this setting, in the absence of endoscopy, intensivists generally provide supportive care (transfusion of blood products) and acid suppression (such as proton pump inhibitors). More recently, octreotide (a somatostatin analogue) has been used in such patients. However, its precise role in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding is not necessarily clear and the drug is associated with significant costs. In this issue of Critical Care, two expert teams debate the merits of using octreotide in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the effects of somatostatin and vasopressin for control of acute variceal bleeding in the patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Acute variceal bleeding is a serious complication of liver cirrhosis, which has an attendant mortality of approximately 60% over two years, and a variety of treatments, such as balloon tamponade, endoscopic varix ligation, sclerotherapy, histoacryl injection and vasoactive drugs, have been used. The aims of the present trial were to compare the effectiveness and complications of somatostatin and vasopressin in the treatment of acute variceal bleeding.

METHODS

Forty-three cirrhotic patients, with endoscopically proven acute variceal bleeding, were included in this trial. Both drugs were given as continuous intravenous infusions for 48 hours. Twenty patients received the somatostatin (250 mcg per hr after a bolus of 50 mcg) and twenty-three the vasopressin (0.4 units per min).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups in relation to age, sex, etiology of cirrhosis, Child-Pugh classification, characteristics of bleeding episode, laboratory findings before randomization and units of transfused blood during therapy. Rebleeding, within 6 hours after beginning of therapy, was regarded as failure to control initial bleeding, and was observed in 3 (13.0%) of the patients who received vasopressin and in 1 (5.0%) treated with somatostatin (p > 0.05). Five patients in both the somatostatin (25.0%) and vasopressin (21.7%) groups rebled during the first 5 days following the initial therapy (p > 0.05). Meaningful complications related to the use of vasopressin were observed in 5 patients (chest pain or abdominal pain requiring nitroglycerin), but no complications were associated with the use of somatostatin (p < 0.05). The mortalities during hospitalization were similar in both the treatment groups. Two of the vasopressin and 1 of the somatostatin group died due to the uncontrolled rebleeding, and 1 of the vasopressin group died due to hepatic failure (2 weeks later after therapy).

CONCLUSION

This study showed no differences in the effectiveness of somatostatin and vasopressin, but the somatostatin group had a lower risk of the complications.