DA-9601 has protective effects comparable to those of proton pump inhibitor and rebamipide against nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-induced upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A nationwide study using Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database.

DA-9601 extracted from Artemisia asiatica contains a bioactive compound - eupatilin - that can protect against gastric mucosal damage through anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative properties and is approved for treating acute and chronic gastritis in Korea, but their ability to protect gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding caused by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is unclear. We aimed to compare the protective effects of DA-9601 to those of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and rebamipide against upper and lower GI bleeding in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) undergoing long-term NSAIDs therapy using the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment database. In this nationwide retrospective cohort study, we evaluated patients with RA who concurrently received NSAIDs for >3 months with DA-9601, PPI, or rebamipide between January 2015 and December 2017. The index date was the date of NSAIDs initiation, and all patients were followed up until December 2020 to detect upper and lower GI bleeding. In total, 24,258 patients with RA were eligible, and 5468 (22.5%), 4417 (18.2%), and 14,373 (59.3%) received DA-9601, PPI, or rebamipide, respectively, on the index date. During follow-up, upper and lower GI bleeding occurred in 508 (2.1%) and 402 (1.6%) patients with RA, respectively. The incidence rate of upper and lower GI bleeding was 615/100,000 and 485/100,000 person-years, respectively. Among patients with RA receiving DA-9601, PPI, or rebamipide, the frequencies of NSAIDs-induced upper GI bleeding were 0.5%, 0.4%, and 1.2%, respectively. The frequencies of NSAIDs-induced lower GI bleeding were 0.4%, 0.4%, and 0.9%, respectively. The incidence of NSAIDs-induced upper GI bleeding in patients with RA receiving DA-9601, PPI, and rebamipide was 601/100,000, 705/100,000, and 596/100,000 person-years, respectively, while the incidence of NSAIDs-induced lower GI bleeding in the same groups was 449/100,000, 608/100,000, and 465/100,000 person-years, respectively. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, no significant difference was observed in lower and upper GI bleeding hazards between patients with RA using DA-9601, PPI, and rebamipide. Our results suggest that DA-9601 may exhibit protection against NSAIDs-induced GI bleeding that is comparable to those of PPI and rebamipide in patients with RA.

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.).

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 secondary outcomes included 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 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.).

Statins, metformin, and RAS inhibitors did not reduce variceal bleeding risk and mortality in a large, real-life cohort of patients with cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: Previous experimental and clinical studies suggested a beneficial effect of statins, metformin, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (RASi) on portal hypertension. Still, their effects on hard cirrhosis-related clinical endpoints, such as variceal bleeding and bleeding-related mortality, remain to be investigated. METHODS: Thus, we recorded the use of statins, metformin and RASi in a large cohort of cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopic band ligation (EBL) for primary (PP, n = 440) and secondary bleeding prophylaxis (SP, n = 480) between 01/2000 and 05/2020. Variceal (re-) bleeding and survival rates were compared between patients with vs. without these co-medications. RESULTS: A total of 920 cirrhotic patients with varices were included. At first EBL, median MELD was 13 and 515 (56%) patients showed ascites. Statins, metformin and RASi were used by 49 (5.3%), 74 (8%), and 91 (9.9%) patients, respectively. MELD and platelet counts were similar in patients with and without the co-medications of interest. Rates of first variceal bleeding and variceal rebleeding at 2 years were 5.2% and 11.7%, respectively. Neither of the co-medications were associated with decreased first bleeding rates (log-rank tests in PP: statins p = 0.813, metformin p = 0.862, RASi p = 0.919) nor rebleeding rates (log-rank tests in SP: statin p = 0.113, metformin p = 0.348, RASi p = 0.273). Similar mortality rates were documented in patients with and without co-medications for PP (log-rank tests: statins p = 0.630, metformin p = 0.591, RASi p = 0.064) and for SP (statins p = 0.720, metformin p = 0.584, RASi p = 0.118). CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, variceal bleeding and mortality rates of cirrhotic patients were not reduced by co-medication with statins, metformin or RASi. Nevertheless, we recommend the use of these co-medications by indication, as they may still exert beneficial effects on non-bleeding complications in patients with liver cirrhosis.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for recompensating decompensated cirrhosis?

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a medical procedure that has been used to manage variceal bleeding and ascites in patients with cirrhosis. It can prevent further decompensation and improve the survival of high-risk decompensated patients. Recent research indicates that TIPS could increase the possibility of recompensation of decompensated cirrhosis when it is combined with adequate suppression of the causative factor of liver disease. However, the results of the studies have been based on retrospective analysis, and further validation is required by conducting randomized controlled studies. In this context, we highlight the limitations of the current studies and emphasize the issues that must be addressed before TIPS can be recommended as a potential recompensating tool.

Continuous co-prescription of rebamipide prevents upper gastrointestinal bleeding in NSAID use for orthopaedic conditions: A nested case-control study using the LIFE Study database.

BACKGROUND: Rebamipide has been widely co-prescribed with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in Japan for decades. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of rebamipide in preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in new users of NSAIDs without risk factors of NSAID-induced ulcers other than age. METHODS: A nested case-control study was conducted using medical claims data of 1.66 million inhabitants of 17 municipalities participating in Japan's Longevity Improvement & Fair Evidence study. The cohort entry (t0) corresponded to a new user of NSAIDs for osteoarthritis or low back pain. Patients with risk factors of NSAID-induced ulcers other than age were excluded. Cases were defined as patients who underwent gastroscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (occurrence date was defined as index date). A maximum of 10 controls were selected from non-cases at the index date of each case by matching sex, age, follow-up time, and type and dosage of NSAIDs. Exposure to rebamipide was defined as prescription status from t0 to index date: Non-user (rebamipide was not co-prescribed during the follow-up period), Continuous-user (rebamipide was co-prescribed from t0 with the same number of tablets as NSAIDs), and Irregular-user (neither Non-user nor Continuous-user). Conditional logistic regression analysis was conducted to estimate each category's odds ratio compared to non-users. FINDINGS: Of 67,561 individuals who met the inclusion criteria, 215 cases and 1,516 controls were selected. Compared with that of Non-users, the odds ratios and 95% confidence interval were 0.65 (0.44-0.96) for Continuous-users and 2.57 (1.73-3.81) for Irregular-users. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous co-prescription of rebamipide significantly reduced the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in an Asian cohort of new users of NSAIDs with osteoarthritis or low back pain without risk factors other than age.

Protocol implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences from a randomized trial of stress ulcer prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many intensive care units (ICUs) halted research to focus on COVID-19-specific studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the conduct of an international randomized trial of stress ulcer prophylaxis (Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU [REVISE]) during the pandemic, addressing enrolment patterns, center engagement, informed consent processes, data collection, a COVID-specific substudy, patient transfers, and data monitoring. METHODS: REVISE is a randomized trial among mechanically ventilated patients, comparing pantoprazole 40 mg IV to placebo on the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding and the primary safety outcome of 90-day mortality. We documented protocol implementation status from March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022. RESULTS: The Steering Committee did not change the scientific protocol. From the first enrolment on July 9th 2019 to March 10th 2020 (8 months preceding the pandemic), 267 patients were enrolled in 18 centers. From March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022 (30 months thereafter), 41 new centers joined; 59 were participating by August 30th 2022 which enrolled 2961 patients. During a total of 1235 enrolment-months in the pandemic phase, enrolment paused for 106 (8.6%) months in aggregate (median 3 months, interquartile range 2;6). Protocol implementation involved a shift from the a priori consent model pre-pandemic (188, 58.8%) to the consent to continue model (1615, 54.1%, p < 0.01). In one new center, an opt-out model was approved. The informed consent rate increased slightly (80.7% to 85.0%, p = 0.05). Telephone consent encounters increased (16.6% to 68.2%, p < 0.001). Surge capacity necessitated intra-institutional transfers; receiving centers continued protocol implementation whenever possible. We developed a nested COVID-19 substudy. The Methods Centers continued central statistical monitoring of trial metrics. Site monitoring was initially remote, then in-person when restrictions lifted. CONCLUSION: Protocol implementation adaptations during the pandemic included a shift in the consent model, a sustained high consent rate, and launch of a COVID-19 substudy. Recruitment increased as new centers joined, patient transfers were optimized, and monitoring methods were adapted.

Widespread use of proton pump inhibitors or potassium-competitive acid blocker has changed the status of gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with ischemic heart disease: real-world data from high volume centers.

BACKGROUND: Although proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or potassium-competitive acid blocker (PCAB) are useful in peptic ulcer prevention, their efficacy in preventing other gastrointestinal bleeding remains unclear. This study aimed to identify the status of gastrointestinal bleeding in the modern era when PPIs are widely used. METHODS: This study included patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between 2018 and 2019 at two high-volume centers. Patients were categorized based on whether they experienced gastrointestinal bleeding within 2 years of PCI into groups A (patients who experienced gastrointestinal bleeding within 2 years after PCI) and B (patients who did not experience gastrointestinal bleeding). RESULTS: Groups A and B included 21 (4.1%) and 494 (95.9%) patients, respectively (a total of 515 patients). Age at the initial PCI (77.8±2.4 and 72.0±0.5 years in groups A and B, respectively; p = 0.02), weight (53.8±3.2 and 61.8±0.7 kg in groups A and B, respectively; p = 0.01), and concomitant warfarin use (14.3% and 2.0% in groups A and B, respectively; p = 0.0005) were significantly different between the groups. The high bleeding risk rate (90.5% and 47.6% in groups A and B, respectively; p = 0.0001) was significantly different between the groups. A total of 95.9% of patients were taking PPIs or PCAB without significant differences between the groups. However, only one patient, who was taking steroids, had a gastric ulcer during PCAB treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Acid-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding is largely controlled by PPIs in post-PCI patients. Furthermore, the risk factors for non-acid-related bleeding include older age, lower weight, and concomitant warfarin use.

Prevention of delayed bleeding after resection of large colonic polyps.

A significant problem encountered in the resection of large, complex colonic polyps is delayed bleeding. This can occur up to two weeks after the procedure and is a significant source of comorbidity. Untreated it can prove life threatening. It is therefore a priority of modern endoscopy to develop and employ techniques to minimaize this. In this article we will review and discuss the evidence base and controversies in this field, with cold EMR technique, Post-EMR clip closure, and topical haemostatic agents.

Evaluation of Aspirin Prescribing and Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Adults 60 Years of Age and Older in a Large, Academic Health System.

Background National guidelines no longer recommend adults 60 years of age and older to begin treatment with low-dose daily aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) due to a lack of proven net benefit and a higher risk of bleeding. Objective The objective of this cross-sectional retrospective analysis was to evaluate the appropriateness of low-dose aspirin prescribing and subsequent gastrointestinal bleeding in older persons receiving primary care in a large academic health system. Setting Large, academic health system within Colorado. Patients Patients with an active order for daily low-dose aspirin as of July 1, 2021, were assessed for appropriateness based on indication (primary vs secondary prevention) and use of a concomitant proton-pump inhibitor (PPI). Incident gastrointestinal bleeds (GIBs) in the subsequent 12 months and GIB risk factors were also evaluated. Results A total of 19,525 patients were included in the analysis. Eighty-nine percent of patients identified as White and 54% identified as male. Of the total cohort, 44% had CVD and 19% were co-prescribed a PPI. GIB occurred in 247 patients (1.27%) within the subsequent year. Risk factors significantly associated with a GIB within 1 year included: history of GIB, history of peptic ulcer disease, other esophageal issue (esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, Mallory Weiss tears, etc.), 75 years of age or older, and history of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Conclusion This evaluation found that many older persons at this institution may be inappropriately prescribed aspirin, providing opportunities for pharmacists to improve medication safety by deprescribing aspirin among primary prevention patients or potentially co-prescribing a PPI in secondary prevention patients.

Temporal trends in use of antisecretory agents among patients administered clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Antisecretory drugs are commonly prescribed with clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to prevent gastrointestinal bleeding in high-risk patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, omeprazole and esomeprazole (inhibiting proton pump inhibitors [PPIs]) may increase cardiovascular event rates on co-administration with clopidogrel. This study aimed to examine trends in the use of antisecretory agents in patients administered clopidogrel-based DAPT and the concomitant use of clopidogrel and inhibiting PPIs. METHODS: We used National Inpatient Sample data compiled by the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service from 2009 to 2020. Further, we identified patients who were prescribed clopidogrel-based DAPT after PCI and investigated the concomitant use of antisecretory agents with clopidogrel. To verify the annual trend of drug utilization, we used the Cochran-Armitage trend test. RESULTS: From 2009 to 2020, the percentage of H2 receptor antagonist users decreased steadily (from 82.5% in 2009 to 25.3% in 2020); instead, the percentage of PPI users increased (from 23.7% in 2009 to 82.0% in 2020). The use of inhibiting PPI also increased (from 4.2% in 2009 to 30.7% in 2020). Potassium competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) were rarely used before 2019; however, in 2020, it accounted for 7.8% of the antisecretory users. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that the use of inhibiting PPIs increased steadily in patients administered clopidogrel-based DAPT therapy. This is a major concern since the concomitant use of inhibiting PPIs with clopidogrel could increase the risk of cardiovascular events.

Navigating the controversy regarding antibiotic prophylaxis in acute variceal bleeding.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding is part of the standard of care according to most clinical guidelines. However, with recent evidence arguing against antibiotic prophylaxis, the role of this intervention has become less clear.

Improvement of quality of care provided to outpatients with hepatic cirrhosis after an educational intervention.

OBJECTIVE: A set of indicators has been reported to measure the quality of care for cirrhotic patients, and previously published studies report variable adherence rates to these indicators. This study aimed to assess the quality of care provided to cirrhotic outpatients before and after an educational intervention by determining its impact on adherence to quality indicators. METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental, cross-sectional study including 324 cirrhotic patients seen in 2017 and 2019 at a tertiary teaching hospital in Spain. Quality indicators were assessed in five domains: documentation of cirrhosis etiology, disease severity assessment, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening, variceal bleeding prophylaxis, and vaccination. After identifying areas for improvement, an educational intervention was implemented. A second evaluation was performed after the intervention to assess changes in adherence rates. RESULTS: Before the intervention, adherence rates were excellent (>90%) for indicators related to variceal bleeding prophylaxis and documentation of cirrhosis etiology, acceptable (60-80%) for HCC screening and disease severity assessment, and poor (<50%) for vaccinations. After the educational intervention, there was a statistically significant improvement in adherence rates for eight indicators related to HCC screening (70-90%), disease severity assessment (90%), variceal bleeding prophylaxis (>90%), and vaccinations (60-90%). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a significant improvement in the quality of care provided to cirrhotic outpatients after an educational intervention. The findings highlight the importance of targeted educational interventions to enhance adherence to quality indicators in the management of cirrhosis.

Beta-blockers or Placebo for Primary Prophylaxis (BOPPP) of oesophageal varices: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Liver disease is within the top five causes of premature death in adults. Deaths caused by complications of cirrhosis continue to rise, whilst deaths related to other non-liver disease areas are declining. Portal hypertension is the primary sequelae of cirrhosis and is associated with the development of variceal haemorrhage, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and infection, collectively termed hepatic decompensation, which leads to hospitalisation and mortality. It remains uncertain whether administering a non-selective beta-blocker (NSBB), specifically carvedilol, at an earlier stage, i.e. when oesophageal varices are small, can prevent VH and reduce all-cause decompensation (ACD). METHODS/DESIGN: The BOPPP trial is a pragmatic, multicentre, placebo-controlled, triple-blinded, randomised controlled trial (RCT) in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Patients aged 18 years or older with cirrhosis and small oesophageal varices that have never bled will be recruited, subject to exclusion criteria. The trial aims to enrol 740 patients across 55 hospitals in the UK. Patients are allocated randomly on a 1:1 ratio to receive either carvedilol 6.25 mg (a NSBB) or a matched placebo, once or twice daily, for 36 months, to attain adequate power to determine the effectiveness of carvedilol in preventing or reducing ACD. The primary outcome is the time to first decompensating event. It is a composite primary outcome made up of variceal haemorrhage (VH, new or worsening ascites, new or worsening hepatic encephalopathy (HE), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), hepatorenal syndrome, an increase in Child-Pugh grade by 1 grade or MELD score by 5 points, and liver-related mortality. Secondary outcomes include progression to medium or large oesophageal varices, development of gastric, duodenal, or ectopic varices, participant quality of life, healthcare costs and transplant-free survival. DISCUSSION: The BOPPP trial aims to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of carvedilol in patients with cirrhosis and small oesophageal varices to determine whether this non-selective beta-blocker can prevent or reduce hepatic decompensation. There is clinical equipoise on whether intervening in cirrhosis, at an earlier stage of portal hypertension, with NSBB therapy is beneficial. Should the trial yield a positive result, we anticipate that the administration and use of carvedilol will become widespread with pathways developed to standardise the administration of the medication in primary care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by the National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committee (REC) (reference number: 19/YH/0015). The results of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Participants will be informed of the results via the BOPPP website ( www.boppp-trial.org ) and partners in the British Liver Trust (BLT) organisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EUDRACT reference number: 2018-002509-78. ISRCTN reference number: ISRCTN10324656. Registered on April 24 2019.

Management of Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet Agents in Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Prevention of Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

Managing gastrointestinal bleeding in patients using antithrombotic agents remains challenging in clinical practice. This review article provides a comprehensive and evidence-based approach to managing acute antithrombotic-related gastrointestinal bleeding, focusing on the triage of patients, appropriate resuscitation, and timely endoscopy. The latest clinical practice guidelines are highlighted to guide decisions concerning the use of reversal agents, temporary interruption, and resumption of antithrombotic drugs. Additionally, preventive measures are discussed to lower the risk of future bleeding and minimize complications among patients prescribed antithrombotic drugs.

The Role of Endoscopy for Primary and Secondary Prophylaxis of Variceal Bleeding.

Cirrhosis is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. One of the most serious and unpredictable complication of cirrhosis, with a high mortality rate, is bleeding from esophagogastric varices. Endoscopic screening of varices followed by primary prophylactic treatment with beta blockers or band ligation in the presence of large esophageal varices will reduce the variceal bleeding rates and thereby reduce mortality risks in those with advanced cirrhosis. There is a paucity of data on primary prophylaxis of gastric varices but secondary prophylaxis includes glue injection, balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration, or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting with coil embolization.