Safety of Intravenous Pantoprazole Sodium in Pediatric Patients Aged 1 Month to < 1 Year: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence rates (IR) of prespecified outcomes of interest in pediatric patients (1 month to < 1 year) treated with intravenous (IV) pantoprazole using Optum's longitudinal electronic health records database (Optum Market Clarity) from the United States (US). METHODS: This real-world, non-interventional, retrospective cohort study was conducted from 01 January 2007 to 31 December 2020 in patients who received IV pantoprazole. Premature patients and those weighing < 2.36 kg were excluded. Patients were categorized based on diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and erosive esophagitis (EE) into: Subgroup 1 (GERD and EE), Subgroup 2 (GERD and no EE), and Subgroup 3 (absence of GERD and EE). Overall IRs (per 1000 person-years [PY]) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of outcomes were estimated (overall and subgroups) and stratified by duration of IV pantoprazole treatment (< 4 days versus ≥ 4 days). RESULTS: Of 1879 eligible patients, none were identified in Subgroup 1; 851 (45.3%) and 1028 (54.7%) patients were identified in Subgroups 2 and 3, respectively. IRs of outcomes of interest ranged from 0.0 to 742.8 per 1000 PY. IRs were highest for vomiting (742.80), diarrhea (377.77), abdominal distension (214.31), hyponatremia (204.99), and hypokalemia (203.49). IRs were comparable between Subgroups 2 and 3. For most outcomes, IRs were higher among patients treated with IV pantoprazole for ≥ 4 days versus those treated for < 4 days. CONCLUSION: These results are consistent with the known safety profile of pantoprazole and emphasize the utility of using real-world data from pediatric populations for assessment of safety outcomes.

Inhaled nitric oxide after left ventricular assist device implantation: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Used frequently for right ventricular dysfunction (RVD), the clinical benefit of inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) is still unclear. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial to determine the effect of iNO on post-operative outcomes in the setting of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement. METHODS: Included were 150 patients undergoing LVAD placement with pulmonary vascular resistance ≥ 200 dyne/sec/cm(-5). Patients received iNO (40 ppm) or placebo (an equivalent concentration of nitrogen) until 48 hours after separation from cardiopulmonary bypass, extubation, or upon meeting study-defined RVD. For ethical reasons, crossover to open-label iNO was allowed during the 48-hour treatment period if RVD criteria were met. RESULTS: RVD criteria were met by 7 of 73 patients (9.6%; 95% confidence interval, 2.8-16.3) in the iNO group compared with 12 of 77 (15.6%; 95% confidence interval, 7.5-23.7) who received placebo (p = 0.330). Time on mechanical ventilation decreased in the iNO group (median days, 2.0 vs 3.0; p = 0.077), and fewer patients in the iNO group required an RVAD (5.6% vs 10%; p = 0.468); however, these trends did not meet statistical boundaries of significance. Hospital stay, intensive care unit stay, and 28-day mortality rates were similar between groups, as were adverse events. Thirty-five patients crossed over to open-label iNO (iNO, n = 15; placebo, n = 20). Eighteen patients (iNO, n = 9; placebo, n = 9) crossed over before RVD criteria were met. CONCLUSIONS: Use of iNO at 40 ppm in the perioperative phase of LVAD implantation did not achieve significance for the primary end point of reduction in RVD. Similarly, secondary end points of time on mechanical ventilation, hospital or intensive care unit stay, and the need for RVAD support after LVAD placement were not significantly improved.