Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis during Invasive Mechanical Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Whether proton-pump inhibitors are beneficial or harmful for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients undergoing invasive ventilation is unclear. METHODS: In this international, randomized trial, we assigned critically ill adults who were undergoing invasive ventilation to receive intravenous pantoprazole (at a dose of 40 mg daily) or matching placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU) at 90 days, and the primary safety outcome was death from any cause at 90 days. Multiplicity-adjusted key secondary outcomes were ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, and patient-important bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4821 patients underwent randomization in 68 ICUs. Clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 25 of 2385 patients (1.0%) receiving pantoprazole and in 84 of 2377 patients (3.5%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.47; P<0.001). At 90 days, death was reported in 696 of 2390 patients (29.1%) in the pantoprazole group and in 734 of 2379 patients (30.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.04; P = 0.25). Patient-important bleeding was reduced with pantoprazole; all other key secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing invasive ventilation, pantoprazole resulted in a significantly lower risk of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding than placebo, with no significant effect on mortality. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; REVISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374800.).

An international, multicenter, survey-based analysis of practice and management of acute liver failure.

Acute liver failure (ALF) is an acute liver dysfunction with coagulopathy and HE in a patient with no known liver disease. As ALF is rare and large clinical trials are lacking, the level of evidence regarding its management is low-moderate, favoring heterogeneous clinical practice. In this international multicenter survey study, we aimed to investigate the current practice and management of patients with ALF. An online survey targeting physicians who care for patients with ALF was developed by the International Liver Transplantation Society ALF Special-Interest Group. The survey focused on the management and liver transplantation (LT) practices of ALF. Survey questions were summarized overall and by geographic region. A total of 267 physicians completed the survey, with a survey response rate of 21.36%. Centers from all continents were represented. More than 90% of physicians specialized in either transplant hepatology/surgery or anesthesiology/critical care. Two hundred fifty-two (94.4%) respondents' institutions offered LT. A total of 76.8% of respondents' centers had a dedicated liver-intensive or transplant-intensive care unit ( p < 0.001). The median time to LT was within 48 hours in 12.7% of respondents' centers, 72 hours in 35.6%, 1 week in 37.6%, and more than 1 week in 9.6% ( p < 0.001). Deceased donor liver graft (49.6%) was the most common type of graft offered. For consideration of LT, 84.8% of physicians used King's College Criteria, and 41.6% used Clichy Criteria. Significant differences were observed between Asia, Europe, and North America for offering LT, number of LTs performed, volume of patients with ALF, admission to a dedicated intensive care unit, median time to LT, type of liver graft, monitoring HE and intracranial pressure, management of coagulopathy, and utilization of different criteria for LT. In our study, we observed significant geographic differences in the practice and management of ALF. As ALF is rare, multicenter studies are valuable for identifying global practice.

Towards personalized medicine: a scoping review of immunotherapy in sepsis.

Despite significant progress in our understanding of the pathophysiology of sepsis and extensive clinical research, there are few proven therapies addressing the underlying immune dysregulation of this life-threatening condition. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the literature evaluating immunotherapy in adult patients with sepsis, emphasizing on methods providing a "personalized immunotherapy" approach, which was defined as the classification of patients into a distinct subgroup or subphenotype, in which a patient's immune profile is used to guide treatment. Subgroups are subsets of sepsis patients, based on any cut-off in a variable. Subphenotypes are subgroups that can be reliably discriminated from other subgroup based on data-driven assessments. Included studies were randomized controlled trials and cohort studies investigating immunomodulatory therapies in adults with sepsis. Studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov, from the first paper available until January 29th, 2024. The search resulted in 15,853 studies. Title and abstract screening resulted in 1409 studies (9%), assessed for eligibility; 771 studies were included, of which 282 (37%) were observational and 489 (63%) interventional. Treatment groups included were treatments targeting the innate immune response, the complement system, coagulation and endothelial dysfunction, non-pharmalogical treatment, pleiotropic drugs, immunonutrition, concomitant treatments, Traditional Chinese Medicine, immunostimulatory cytokines and growth factors, intravenous immunoglobulins, mesenchymal stem cells and immune-checkpoint inhibitors. A personalized approach was incorporated in 70 studies (9%). Enrichment was applied using cut-offs in temperature, laboratory, biomarker or genetic variables. Trials often showed conflicting results, possibly due to the lack of patient stratification or the potential influence of severity and timing on immunomodulatory therapy results. When a personalized approach was applied, trends of clinical benefit for several interventions emerged, which hold promise for future clinical trials using personalized immunotherapy.

Guidelines for the Management of Adult Acute and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the ICU: Neurology, Peri-Transplant Medicine, Infectious Disease, and Gastroenterology Considerations.

OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU. DESIGN: The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. INTERVENTIONS: In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.

Diarrhea in the critically ill: definitions, epidemiology, risk factors and outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this paper, we review the current evidence with respect to definitions, risk factors, and outcomes of diarrhea in the critically ill and highlight research gaps in the literature. RECENT FINDINGS: Definitions of diarrhea in the intensive care unit (ICU) include the World Health Organization quantified as >3 liquid bowel movements per day and the Bristol Stool Chart score of 7. Diarrhea incidence is 37.7-73.8% and varies based on definition applied. Clostridioides difficile associated diarrhea (CDAD) is uncommon with an incidence of 2.2%. Risk factors for diarrhea include total number of antibiotics, enteral nutrition, and suppository use. The composition of enteral nutrition including high osmolarity and high fiber feeds contributed to diarrhea occurrence. Opiates decrease diarrhea incidence whereas probiotics have no effect on the incidence or duration of diarrhea. Outcomes of diarrhea include increased length of stay in the ICU and hospital, however its impact on mortality is unclear. SUMMARY: Diarrhea remains a common problem in clinical practice and attention must be paid to modifiable risk factors. Further research is needed on interventions to decrease its burden.

Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in cardiac arrest: a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized control trials.

BACKGROUND: Post-cardiac arrest, outcomes for most patients are poor, regardless of setting. Many patients who do achieve spontaneous return of circulation require vasopressor therapy to maintain organ perfusion. There is some evidence to support the use of corticosteroids in cardiac arrest. RESEARCH QUESTION: Assess the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids in patients following in- and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We searched databases CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrails.gov, and ICTRP. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids, as compared to placebo or usual care in patients post-cardiac arrest. We pooled estimates of effect size using random effects meta-analysis and report relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risk of bias (ROB) for the included trials using the modified Cochrane ROB tool and rated the certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. RESULTS: We included 8 RCTs (n = 2213 patients). Corticosteroids administered post-cardiac arrest had an uncertain effect on mortality measured at the longest point of follow-up (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.90-1.02, very low certainty, required information size not met using trial sequential analysis). Corticosteroids probably increase return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.18-1.47, moderate certainty) and may increase the likelihood of survival with good functional outcome (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.87-2.54, low certainty). Corticosteroids may decrease the risk of ventilator associated pneumonia (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.46-1.09, low certainty), may increase renal failure (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.84-1.99, low certainty), and have an uncertain effect on bleeding (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.53-7.84, very low certainty) and peritonitis (RR 10.54, 95% CI 2.99-37.19, very low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: In patients during or after cardiac arrest, corticosteroids have an uncertain effect on mortality but probably increase ROSC and may increase the likelihood of survival with good functional outcome at hospital discharge. Corticosteroids may decrease ventilator associated pneumonia, may increase renal failure, and have an uncertain effect on bleeding and peritonitis. However, the pooled evidence examining these outcomes was sparse and imprecision contributed to low or very low certainty of evidence.

The Comparative Effectiveness of Vasoactive Treatments for Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Evidence examining commonly used drug treatments remains uncertain. We assessed the comparative effectiveness of inpatient treatments for HRS by performing a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Pairs of reviewers independently identified eligible RCTs that enrolled patients with type 1 or 2 HRS. Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data. DATA SYNTHESIS: We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool for RCTs and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. Our main outcomes are all-cause mortality, HRS reversal, and serious adverse events. Of 3,079 citations, we included 26 RCTs examining 1,736 patients. Based on pooled analysis, terlipressin increases HRS reversal compared with placebo (142 reversals per 1,000 [95% CI, >87.7 to >210.9]; high certainty). Norepinephrine (112.7 reversals per 1,000 [95% CI, 52.6 to >192.3]) may increase HRS reversal compared with placebo (low certainty). The effect of midodrine+octreotide (67.8 reversals per 1,000 [95% CI, <2.8 to >177.4]; very low) on HRS reversal is uncertain. Terlipressin may reduce mortality compared with placebo (93.7 fewer deaths [95% CI, 168.7 to <12.5]; low certainty). Terlipressin probably increases the risk of serious adverse events compared with placebo (20.4 more events per 1,000 [95% CI, <5.1 to >51]; moderate certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Terlipressin increases HRS reversal compared with placebo. Terlipressin may reduce mortality. Until access to terlipressin improves, initial norepinephrine administration may be more appropriate than initial trial with midodrine+octreotide. Our review has the potential to inform future guideline and practice in the treatment of HRS.

Tranexamic Acid in Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Tranexamic acid is proposed as a treatment for gastrointestinal bleeding. The Haemorrhage Alleviation with Tranexamic Acid-Intestinal System trial evaluated extended-use (24 hr) high-dose tranexamic acid, prompting a reappraisal for tranexamic acid in gastrointestinal bleeding. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing tranexamic acid with usual care or placebo in adults with gastrointestinal bleeding. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (inception to September 2019). DATA SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool in duplicate. The main outcomes were mortality, bleeding, and adverse events. DATA EXTRACTION: Studies were analyzed as high-dose IV tranexamic acid versus all other dosing strategies for tranexamic acid using fixed-effects models. We assessed certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. DATA SYNTHESIS: Five randomized controlled trials evaluated extended-use high-dose IV tranexamic acid, seven evaluating low-dose IV or enteral tranexamic acid. Extended-use high-dose IV tranexamic acid did not reduce mortality (relative risk, 0.98%; 95% CI, 0.88-1.09; I2 = 63%; high certainty) or bleeding (relative risk, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.82-1.04; p = 0.17 and absolute risk differences, -0.7%; 95% CI, -1.5 to 0.3; high certainty) but resulted in a small increase in deep venous thrombosis (relative risk, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.08-3.72; I2 = 0%), pulmonary embolism (relative risk, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.06-3.0; I2 = 0%), and seizure (relative risk, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.03-2.93) with high certainty. Low-dose IV/enteral tranexamic acid did not reduce mortality (relative risk, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.36-1.09; I2 = 0%) but did reduce risk of rebleeding (relative risk, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.33-0.75; I2 = 9%) and need for surgery (relative risk, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38-0.88; I2 = 11%), with moderate certainty. CONCLUSIONS: Extended-use high-dose IV tranexamic acid does not improve mortality or bleeding outcomes and increases adverse events. Low-dose/enteral tranexamic acid may be effective in reducing hemorrhage; more evidence is required to demonstrate its safety.

Probiotics in Critical Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the safety and efficacy of probiotics or synbiotics on morbidity and mortality in critically ill adults and children. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and unpublished sources from inception to May 4, 2021. STUDY SELECTION: We performed a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared enteral probiotics or synbiotics to placebo or no treatment in critically ill patients. We screened studies independently and in duplicate. DATA EXTRACTION: Independent reviewers extracted data in duplicate. A random-effects model was used to pool data. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sixty-five RCTs enrolled 8,483 patients. Probiotics may reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) (relative risk [RR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89 and risk difference [RD], 6.9% reduction; 95% CI, 2.7-10.2% fewer; low certainty), healthcare-associated pneumonia (HAP) (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.89; RD, 5.5% reduction; 95% CI, 8.2-2.0% fewer; low certainty), ICU length of stay (LOS) (mean difference [MD], 1.38 days fewer; 95% CI, 0.57-2.19 d fewer; low certainty), hospital LOS (MD, 2.21 d fewer; 95% CI, 1.18-3.24 d fewer; low certainty), and duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (MD, 2.53 d fewer; 95% CI, 1.31-3.74 d fewer; low certainty). Probiotics probably have no effect on mortality (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.87-1.04 and RD, 1.1% reduction; 95% CI, 2.8% reduction to 0.8% increase; moderate certainty). Post hoc sensitivity analyses without high risk of bias studies negated the effect of probiotics on VAP, HAP, and hospital LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Low certainty RCT evidence suggests that probiotics or synbiotics during critical illness may reduce VAP, HAP, ICU and hospital LOS but probably have no effect on mortality.

In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, adding convalescent plasma to usual care did not reduce 28-d mortality.

SOURCE CITATION: RECOVERY Collaborative Group. Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial. Lancet. 2021;397:2049-59. 34000257.

Guidelines for the Management of Adult Acute and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the ICU: Cardiovascular, Endocrine, Hematologic, Pulmonary, and Renal Considerations.

OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute or acute on chronic liver failure in the ICU. DESIGN: The guideline panel comprised 29 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure and/or methodology. The Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy were followed throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. SETTING: The panel was divided into nine subgroups: cardiovascular, hematology, pulmonary, renal, endocrine and nutrition, gastrointestinal, infection, perioperative, and neurology. INTERVENTIONS: We developed and selected population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes question, we conducted a systematic review aiming to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence whenever applicable, and assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In this article, we report 29 recommendations (from 30 population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes questions) on the management acute or acute on chronic liver failure in the ICU, related to five groups (cardiovascular, hematology, pulmonary, renal, and endocrine). Overall, six were strong recommendations, 19 were conditional recommendations, four were best-practice statements, and in two instances, the panel did not issue a recommendation due to insufficient evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary international experts were able to formulate evidence-based recommendations for the management acute or acute on chronic liver failure in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low-quality indirect evidence.

Management of severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ICU.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common condition that can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Critical care physicians usually get involved in the care of patients with severe UGIB that is associated with hemodynamic compromise. We aim to provide the readers with evidence-based review of the management of patients with severe UGIB. RECENT FINDINGS: Proton pump inhibitors are the main pharmacologic intervention for UGIB, along with adequate resuscitation and timely endoscopic intervention. Endoscopic therapy should be performed as soon as haemodynamics stabilization is achieved, which requires team collaboration. Several radiologic interventions are now commonly used as a second-line intervention after endoscopy. SUMMARY: The management of severe UGIB requires multidisciplinary collaboration, prompt recognition and resuscitation, carful use of blood products, early correction of coagulopathy, and early endoscopic or radiologic interventions.

Transfusion in critical care: Past, present and future.

Anaemia and coagulopathy are common in critically ill patients and are associated with poor outcomes, including increased risk of mortality, myocardial infarction, failure to be liberated from mechanical ventilation and poor physical recovery. Transfusion of blood and blood products remains the corner stone of anaemia and coagulopathy treatment in critical care. However, determining when the benefits of transfusion outweigh the risks of anaemia may be challenging in some critically ill patients. Therefore, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine prioritised the development of a clinical practice guideline to address anaemia and coagulopathy in non-bleeding critically ill patients. The aims of this article are to: (1) review the evolution of transfusion practice in critical care and the direction for future developments in this important area of transfusion medicine and (2) to provide a brief synopsis of the guideline development process and recommendations in a format designed for busy clinicians and blood bank staff. These clinical practice guidelines provide recommendations to clinicians on how best to manage non-bleeding critically ill patients at the bedside. More research is needed on alternative transfusion targets, use of transfusions in special populations (e.g., acute neurological injury, acute coronary syndromes), use of anaemia prevention strategies and point-of-care interventions to guide transfusion strategies.

Continuous renal replacement therapy and survival in acute liver failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Acute liver failure (ALF) is a rare syndrome leading to significant morbidity and mortality. An important cause of mortality is cerebral edema due to hyperammonemia. Different therapies for hyperammonemia have been assessed including continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of CRRT in ALF patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Inclusion criteria included adult patients admitted to an ICU with ALF. Intervention was the use of CRRT for one or more indications with the comparator being standard care without the use of CRRT. Outcomes of interest were overall survival, transplant-free survival (TFS), mortality and changes in serum ammonia levels. RESULTS: In total, 305 patients underwent CRRT while 1137 patients did not receive CRRT. CRRT was associated with improved overall survival [risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.99, p-value 0.04, I2 = 50%] and improved TFS (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.49-0.85, p-value 0.002, I2 = 25%). There was a trend towards higher mortality with no CRRT (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.84-1.81, p-value 0.28, I2 = 37%). Ammonia clearance data was unable to be pooled and was not analyzable. CONCLUSION: Use of CRRT in ALF patients is associated with improved overall and transplant-free survival compared to no CRRT.

Adjudication of a primary trial outcome: Results of a calibration exercise and protocol for a large international trial.

Background: Ascertainment of the severity of the primary outcome of upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is integral to stress ulcer prophylaxis trials. This protocol outlines the adjudication process for GI bleeding events in an international trial comparing pantoprazole to placebo in critically ill patients (REVISE: Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions). The primary objective of the adjudication process is to assess episodes submitted by participating sites to determine which fulfil the definition of the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important upper GI bleeding. Secondary objectives are to categorize the bleeding severity if deemed not clinically important, and adjudicate the bleeding site, timing, investigations, and treatments. Methods: Research coordinators follow patients daily for any suspected clinically important upper GI bleeding, and submit case report forms, doctors' and nurses' notes, laboratory, imaging, and procedural reports to the methods center. An international central adjudication committee reflecting diverse specialty backgrounds conducted an initial calibration exercise to delineate the scope of the adjudication process, review components of the definition, and agree on how each criterion will be considered fulfilled. Henceforth, bleeding events will be stratified by study drug, and randomly assigned to adjudicator pairs (blinded to treatment allocation, and study center). Results: Crude agreement, chance-corrected agreement, or chance-independent agreement if data have a skewed distribution will be calculated. Conclusions: Focusing on consistency and accuracy, central independent blinded duplicate adjudication of suspected clinically important upper GI bleeding events will determine which events fulfil the definition of the primary efficacy outcome for this stress ulcer prophylaxis trial. Registration: NCT03374800 (REVISE: Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions).

Proton-Pump Inhibitors to Prevent Gastrointestinal Bleeding - An Updated Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy and safety of proton-pump inhibitors for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients. METHODS: We included randomized trials comparing proton-pump inhibitors versus placebo or no prophylaxis in critically ill adults, performed meta-analyses, and assessed certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. To explore the effect of proton-pump inhibitors on mortality based on disease severity, a subgroup analysis was conducted combining within-trial subgroup data from the two largest trials and assessed credibility using the Instrument for Assessing the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses. RESULTS: Twelve trials that enrolled 9533 patients were included. Proton-pump inhibitors were associated with a reduced incidence of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding (relative risk [RR], 0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34 to 0.76]; high certainty evidence). Proton-pump inhibitors may have little or no effect on mortality (RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.05]; low certainty). Within-trial subgroup analysis with intermediate credibility suggested that the effect of proton-pump inhibitors on mortality may differ based on disease severity. Subgroup results raise the possibility that proton-pump inhibitors may decrease 90-day mortality in less severely ill patients (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.98) and may increase mortality in more severely ill patients (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.20]. Proton-pump inhibitors may have no effect on pneumonia and little or no effect on Clostridioides difficile infection (low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: High certainty evidence supports the association of proton-pump inhibitors with decreased upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Proton-pump inhibitors may have little or no effect on mortality, although a decrease in mortality in less severely ill patients and an increase in mortality in more severely ill patients remain possible. (PROSPERO number CRD42023461695.).

Patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ICU: A mixed-methods study of patient and family perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to create a definition of patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding during critical illness as an outcome for a randomized trial. DESIGN: This was a sequential mixed-methods qualitative-dominant multi-center study with an instrument-building aim. In semi-structured individual interviews or focus groups we elicited views from survivors of critical illness and family members of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding which features indicate important gastrointestinal bleeding. Quantitative demographic characteristics were collected. We analyzed qualitative data using inductive content analysis to develop a definition for patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding. SETTING: Canada and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 51 ICU survivors and family members of ICU patients. RESULTS: Participants considered gastrointestinal bleeding to be important if it resulted in death, disability, or prolonged hospitalization. The following also signaled patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding: blood transfusion, vasopressors, endoscopy, CT-angiography, or surgery. Whether an intervention evinced concern depended on its effectiveness, side-effects, invasiveness and accessibility; contextual influences included participant familiarity and knowledge of interventions and trust in the clinical team. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of critical illness and family members described patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding differently than current definitions of clinically-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.