Impact of Proton-pump Inhibitors on the Pharmacodynamic Effect and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Receiving Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Propensity Score Analysis

Risk of stroke associated with proton pump inhibitor use among individuals with and without pre-existing cardiovascular diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly used for managing gastroesophageal disorders but concerns about their potential association with increased stroke risk have emerged, especially among patients with pre-existing cardiovascular conditions such as acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to assess the risk of stroke associated with PPI use, stratified by the presence or absence of pre-existing CVD.

METHODS

This review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and included studies up to March 2024 from PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Eligible studies were longitudinal, including prospective cohorts, nested case-controls, and post-hoc analyses of RCTs that reported stroke outcomes in relation to PPI use. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis models in R software version 4.3.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 41 studies encompassing over 800,000 participants globally. Meta-analysis of 14 observational studies revealed a slight but non-significant increased stroke risk among patients with prior CVD (pooled HR = 1.222, 95% CI: 0.963 to 1.481, I² = 78%). In contrast, analysis of 15 studies without prior CVD showed a modestly increased risk (pooled HR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.023 to 1.288, I² = 98%). Five RCTs involving patients with CVD reported a pooled RR of 1.158 (95% CI: 0.914 to 1.466), indicating no significant risk increase.

CONCLUSION

The association between PPI use and stroke risk appears modest and is influenced by the presence of cardiovascular conditions. Clinical decision-making should consider individual patient risk profiles, and further high-quality studies are needed to guide safer PPI prescribing practices.

Adverse cardiovascular outcomes associated with proton pump inhibitor use after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly prescribed for gastroprotection in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), who are at increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding due to antiplatelet therapy. However, emerging evidence suggests that PPIs may adversely impact cardiovascular outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to assess the relationship between using PPIs and cardiovascular outcomes in patients following PCI.

METHODS

We searched various databases up to March 15, 2024, for observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the cardiovascular effects of PPIs in PCI patients. Data were extracted on study characteristics, patient demographics, PPI use, and cardiovascular outcomes. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 assessed study quality. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model using R software version 4.3.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies involving diverse populations and study designs were included. Observational studies suggested a moderate increase in risk for composite cardiovascular diseases (CVD), myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) associated with PPI use, with pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.20 (95% CI: 1.093-1.308) for CVD, 1.186 (95% CI: 1.069-1.303) for MI, and 1.155 (95% CI: 1.001-1.309) for MACE. However, RCTs showed no significant link between PPI therapy and negative cardiovascular events (Relative Risk: 1.016, 95% CI: 0.878-1.175). Substantial heterogeneity was observed among observational studies but not RCTs.

CONCLUSION

The findings indicate that while observational studies suggest a potential risk of adverse cardiovascular events with post-PCI use of PPI, RCTs do not support this association. Further large-scale, high-quality studies are required to understand the cardiovascular implications of individual PPIs better and optimize patient management post-PCI. This analysis shows the complexity of PPI use in patients with coronary artery diseases and the necessity to balance gastroprotective benefits against potential cardiovascular risks.

Efficacy and safety of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors with aspirin-clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are usually prescribed to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) complications in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of the concomitant use of PPIs with aspirin-clopidogrel DAPT in patients with Coronary heart disease (CHD). Method: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to August 2022 for eligible studies. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate the clinical outcomes. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to different PPI subtypes, populations, follow-up times and study types. This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022332195). Results: A total of 173,508 patients from 18 studies [2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 3 post hoc analyses of RCTs, and 13 cohort studies] were included in this study. Pooled data revealed that coadministration of PPIs significantly increased the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.06-1.26, p = .001) and reduced the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) complications (HR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.30-0.64, p < .0001). Subgroup analysis results showed that the esomeprazole users and patients with coronary stenting in the PPI group were associated with an increased risk of MACEs compared with the non-PPI group. The occurrence of MACEs in PPI users was more common than that in non-PPI users in long-term follow-up (≥12 months) studies and in the observational studies. There was no significant differences in the incidences of net clinical adverse events (NACEs), all-cause mortality, or cardiac death between the two groups. Conclusion: In patients with CHD, the concomitant use of PPIs with aspirin and clopidogrel was associated with a reduced risk of GI complications but could increase the rates of MACEs (particularly in patients receiving esomeprazole or with coronary stenting). There was no clear evidence of an association between PPI use and NACEs, all-cause mortality, or cardiac death. The results could have been affected by the follow-up time and study type. Further large-scale RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed.

Co-prescription of Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy and Proton Pump Inhibitors: Current Guidelines

Dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) prevents thrombotic complications associated with coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndrome, and stent thrombosis following the percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting. When initiating DAPT, the risk of thrombosis must be balanced with the increased risk of upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB). Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are concurrently prescribed with DAPT to reduce bleeding risk. In this review, we discuss the benefits and potential complications of DAPT/PPI co-prescription. The only large international randomized control trial (RCT), Clopidogrel and the Optimization of Gastrointestinal Events Trial (COGENT), shows robust evidence that PPIs are a safe and effective method to reduce the risk of bleeding in patients on DAPT. However, more large-scale RCTs are needed to study potential long-term effects and draw a stronger conclusion on this topic.

Clinical Outcomes of Concomitant Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The safety and efficacy associated with the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) by patients with coronary artery disease receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) remain unclear. Methods: The evaluated outcomes included combined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. A random effects meta-analysis, stratified by study design, was performed and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Results: In total, 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (6930 patients) and 16 observational studies (183,546 patients) were included. Analysis of RCTs showed that there were no significant differences in the incidences of MACEs (risk ratio [RR] = 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.75-1.05]), MI (RR = 0.93 [95% CI = 0.76-1.15]), and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.79 [95% CI = 0.50-1.23]) in the PPI groups vs. the non-PPI groups. Pooled data from observational studies revealed an inconsistent association between the use of each PPI subtype and the increased risks of MACEs during clopidogrel treatment. There was no increased risk of MACEs or all-cause mortality associated with the use of PPIs (as a class) and other P2Y12 inhibitors. Both the RCTs and observational studies revealed that the use of PPIs significantly reduced the risks of GI bleeding. Conclusion: The use of PPIs was associated with a reduced risk of GI bleeding in patients treated with DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention or acute coronary syndrome. There was no clear evidence of an association between the use of PPIs and adverse cardiovascular events. Clinical Trial Registration: identifier [CRD42020190315].

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: The Effects of Prophylactic Proton Pump Inhibitor Treatment in Patients With Coronary Heart Disease Receiving Dual Antiplatelet Therapy

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used in clinical treatment. However, the pharmacokinetic interaction between PPIs and DAPT is still unclear in patients with cardiovascular disease. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the risks and benefits of the combination of PPI and DAPT in patients with coronary heart disease. The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched from inception to April 1, 2020, for eligible studies. The outcomes investigated in this study included major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, all-cause death, gastrointestinal complications, and platelet function testing. Studies were excluded from the review if other gastrointestinal medication or aspirin or P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy was administered. The review included 52 studies, and data from 40 studies were extracted for meta-analysis. No association was found between the risk of adverse clinical outcomes and the combination of PPI and DAPT based on the randomized controlled trial data (risk ratio: 0.98; 95% confidence interval: 0.87-1.09; P = 0.877; I2 = 0%). However, an increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes due to the use of PPIs was observed in patients treated with DAPT based on the data from observational studies (risk ratio: 1.259; 95% confidence interval: 1.079-1.468; P = 0.003; I2 = 67.8%), although the heterogeneity of these studies was high. In conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that pharmacokinetic interactions between PPI and DAPT do not lead to adverse clinical outcomes.

Ethnic variance on long term clinical outcomes of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel in patients with stent implantation: A PRISMA-complaint systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study showed a lower clopidogrel response when coprescribed with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Despite this, PPIs is necessary for patients treated with long term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Ethnic variance also played a different effect on clopidogrel response. Our study evaluated the effect of concomitant use of DAPT and PPIs and assessed whether ethnic variance exert different effect on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We carefully searched EMBASE, PubMed/Medline databases, and the Cochrane library in April 2019. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and individual endpoints reported. We also focused on bleeding events. Studies were excluded if the follow-up were <12 months and patients were not treated with clopidogrel after stent implantation.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies were included in the systematic review (involving 79,670 patients). No randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. PPIs comedication were associated with increased MACCE (odds ratio [OR] = 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.28-1.49) while not associated with decreased bleeding risks, such as gastrointestinal bleeding (OR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.53-2.11). PPIs comedication were associated with increased risk for all endpoints among Caucasian population while not with increased risk for MACE (OR = 1.20; 95% CI = 0.99-1.39), all-cause death (OR = 1.24; 95% CI = 0.74-2.06), cardiac-death (OR = 1.29; 95% CI = 0.64-2.57) among Asian population.

CONCLUSION

PPIs comedication were associated with adverse clinical outcomes, and ethnic variance may exert different effect on clinical outcomes. Subgroup analysis indicated that concomitant use of PPI might be suitable for Asian patients after stent implantation.

Impact of proton pump inhibitors on clinical outcomes in patients after acute myocardial infarction: a propensity score analysis from China Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAMI) registry

Background

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are recommended by the latest guidelines to reduce the risk of bleeding in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, previous pharmacodynamic and clinical studies have reported controversial results on the interaction between PPI and the P₂Y₁₂ inhibitor clopidogrel. We investigated the impact of PPIs use on in-hospital outcomes in AMI patients, aiming to provide a new insight on the value of PPIs.

Methods

A total of 23, 380 consecutive AMI patients who received clopidogrel with or without PPIs in the China Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAMI) registry were analyzed. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) defined as a composite of in-hospital cardiac death, re-infarction and stroke. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to control potential baseline confounders. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of PPIs use on MACCE and gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB).

Results

Among the whole AMI population, a large majority received DAPT and 67.5% were co-medicated with PPIs. PPIs use was associated with a decreased risk of MACCE (Before PSM OR: 0.857, 95% CI: 0.742-0.990, P = 0.0359; after PSM OR: 0.862, 95% CI: 0.768-0.949, P = 0.0245) after multivariate adjustment. Patients receiving PPIs also had a lower risk of cardiac death but a higher risk of complicating with stroke. When GIB occurred, an alleviating trend of GIB severity was observed in PPIs group.

Conclusions

Our study is the first nation-wide large-scale study to show evidence on PPIs use in AMI patients treated with DAPT. We found that PPIs in combination with clopidogrel was associated with decreased risk for MACCE in AMI patients, and it might have a trend to mitigate GIB severity. Therefore, PPIs could become an available choice for AMI patients during hospitalization.

Proton pump inhibitors and cardiovascular adverse effects: Real or surreal worries?

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most widely prescribed agents, either for treatment or prophylaxis of gastrointestinal (GI) disease, that are often administered for prolonged or chronic use. Patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease frequently receive PPIs for prophylaxis against GI bleeding due to common use of antithrombotic drugs. Over the last several years there is a growing number of reports associating chronic PPI use with a variety of serious CV and non-CV adverse effects. In this context, PPI use has been independently associated with an increased risk of CV morbidity (myocardial infarction, stroke, other CV events) and mortality. However, the critique remains that these data do not largely derive from randomized controlled trials. On the other hand, in certain conditions, the benefits of PPIs may outweigh the risks of adverse CV effects. As the indications for prolonged, particularly lifelong, prophylactic use of PPIs are not compelling and in the light of evidence of serious CV and other adverse effects, clinicians have to reconsider such long-term use of these drugs. Importantly, histamine 2 blockers have not been found to be associated with increased CV risk and thus may be an alternative therapeutic option in certain patients. These issues are amply discussed together with the potential mechanisms of these pleiotropic and off-target effects of PPIs, which are also depicted in an illustrative schema; data are also presented on differential effects of specific agents involved, alternative modes of therapy available, and relevant current guidelines on this issue.

CYP2C19 phenotype in South-East Asian Acute Coronary Syndrome patients and impact on major adverse cardiovascular events

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Several Caucasian cohort studies have associated at least one loss-of-function CYP2C19 on Clopidogrel (LoF-Clopidogrel) with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and only a couple have used Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC^® ) phenotype grouping to study the associations. We primarily aimed to study the impact of use of platelet reactivity testing to escalate antiplatelet therapy and secondarily to study the association of CPIC phenotype with MACE outcomes in South-East Asian Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) subjects.

METHOD

A retrospective genotype study was performed on 238 percutaneous coronary intervention subjects, originally planned for escalation of antiplatelets using platelet reactivity testing.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

There was no difference in MACE between the switched and unswitched groups; however, 'all bleeds' and 'clinically significant bleeds' (CSB) were statistically higher in the patients who were switched to prasugrel. The subgroup of patients who remained on clopidogrel (n = 199) were analysed using phenotype categories and MACE. Eleven percent (11.4%) of CYP2C19 poor metabolizers (PM) suffered MACE, compared with 1.3% of extensive metabolizers (EM). LoF-Clopidogrel patients are significantly more likely to experience MACE compared with non-LoF subjects (8.0% vs 5.4%, P: .041).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

In our multivariate analysis, LoF-Clopidogrel, malay ethnicity, diabetics and use of proton pump inhibitors were independent predictors of MACE. There were numerically more bleeds in LoF subjects who were on prasugrel compared with Clopidogrel (23.5% vs 11%, P = .082). Our data corroborate with current findings on platelet reactivity testing, suggesting that the assay would not be sensitive enough to pick up sufficient 'at-risk' subjects as compared to the use of CYP2C19 genotyping.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Long-term Proton Pump Inhibitor Use

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) potently inhibit gastric acid secretion and are widely used for treatment of acid-related diseases including gastroesophageal reflux disease and secondary prevention of aspirin/NSAID-induced ulcers. Although clinically important adverse effects of PPIs can occur, just as with other drugs, those are not frequently observed during or after administration. Thus, PPIs are regarded as relatively safe and considered to be clinically beneficial. Recently, PPIs have become frequently administered to patients with functional gastrointestinal diseases or primary prevention of drug-related gastroduodenal damage, even though their beneficial effects for those conditions have not been fully confirmed. PPIs tend to be given for conditions in which the necessity of the drug has not been clarified, thus otherwise rare adverse effects are presented as clinically relevant. Although several PPI-related adverse effects have been reported, their clinical relevance is not yet clear, since the evidence reported in those studies is not at a high enough level, as the majority are based on retrospective observational studies and the reported hazard ratios are low. It is important to administer PPIs only for patients who will gain a substantial clinical benefit and to continue to investigate their adverse effects with high quality prospective studies.

Low Levels of High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Are Linked to Impaired Clopidogrel-Mediated Platelet Inhibition

Low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels are an independent predictor of ischemic events in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This may in part be due to decreased clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition in patients with low HDL-C. We investigated the association of HDL-C with on-treatment platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate (ADP) in 314 patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin undergoing angioplasty and stenting. Platelet P-selectin expression was assessed by flow cytometry, and platelet aggregation was determined by the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay and the Impact-R. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were inversely associated with P-selectin expression and the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay (both P ≤ .01). Moreover, we found a positive correlation of HDL-C with surface coverage by the Impact-R ( P = .003). Patients with low HDL-C (≤35 mg/dL) exhibited a significantly higher P-selectin expression in response to ADP and higher platelet aggregation by the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay and the Impact-R than patients with normal HDL-C (>35 mg/dL; all P < .05). High on-treatment residual platelet reactivity by the VerifyNow P2Y₁₂ assay occurred significantly more frequently in patients with low HDL-C levels than in those with normal HDL-C (47.4% vs 30.1%, P = .01). In conclusion, low HDL-C is linked to impaired clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition after angioplasty and stenting.