-
Critical Care (London, England) May 2020Gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction is frequent in the critically ill but can be overlooked as a result of the lack of standardization of the diagnostic and therapeutic...
Gastrointestinal dysfunction in the critically ill: a systematic scoping review and research agenda proposed by the Section of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Nutrition of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.
BACKGROUND
Gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction is frequent in the critically ill but can be overlooked as a result of the lack of standardization of the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. We aimed to develop a research agenda for GI dysfunction for future research. We systematically reviewed the current knowledge on a broad range of subtopics from a specific viewpoint of GI dysfunction, highlighting the remaining areas of uncertainty and suggesting future studies.
METHODS
This systematic scoping review and research agenda was conducted following successive steps: (1) identify clinically important subtopics within the field of GI function which warrant further research; (2) systematically review the literature for each subtopic using PubMed, CENTRAL and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; (3) summarize evidence for each subtopic; (4) identify areas of uncertainty; (5) formulate and refine study proposals that address these subtopics; and (6) prioritize study proposals via sequential voting rounds.
RESULTS
Five major themes were identified: (1) monitoring, (2) associations between GI function and outcome, (3) GI function and nutrition, (4) management of GI dysfunction and (5) pathophysiological mechanisms. Searches on 17 subtopics were performed and evidence summarized. Several areas of uncertainty were identified, six of them needing consensus process. Study proposals ranked among the first ten included: prevention and management of diarrhoea; management of upper and lower feeding intolerance, including indications for post-pyloric feeding and opioid antagonists; acute gastrointestinal injury grading as a bedside tool; the role of intra-abdominal hypertension in the development and monitoring of GI dysfunction and in the development of non-occlusive mesenteric ischaemia; and the effect of proton pump inhibitors on the microbiome in critical illness.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence on GI dysfunction is scarce, partially due to the lack of precise definitions. The use of core sets of monitoring and outcomes are required to improve the consistency of future studies. We propose several areas for consensus process and outline future study projects.
Topics: Critical Care; Critical Illness; Diagnostic Imaging; Europe; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Nutritional Status
PubMed: 32414423
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-02889-4 -
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Jun 2021Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used for acid suppression in the treatment and prevention of many conditions, including gastroesophageal reflux disease, gastric...
Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used for acid suppression in the treatment and prevention of many conditions, including gastroesophageal reflux disease, gastric and duodenal ulcers, erosive esophagitis, Helicobacter pylori infection, and pathological hypersecretory conditions. Most PPIs are metabolized primarily by cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) into inactive metabolites, and CYP2C19 genotype has been linked to PPI exposure, efficacy, and adverse effects. We summarize the evidence from the literature and provide therapeutic recommendations for PPI prescribing based on CYP2C19 genotype (updates at www.cpicpgx.org). The potential benefits of using CYP2C19 genotype data to guide PPI therapy include (i) identifying patients with genotypes predictive of lower plasma exposure and prescribing them a higher dose that will increase the likelihood of efficacy, and (ii) identifying patients on chronic therapy with genotypes predictive of higher plasma exposure and prescribing them a decreased dose to minimize the risk of toxicity that is associated with long-term PPI use, particularly at higher plasma concentrations.
Topics: Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Genotype; Humans; Pharmacogenetics; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 32770672
DOI: 10.1002/cpt.2015 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are usually prescribed to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) complications in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This...
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.
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). 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). A total of 173,508 patients from 18 studies [2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 3 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, = .001) and reduced the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) complications (HR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.30-0.64, .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. 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.
PubMed: 36703730
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.1021584 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Aug 2023Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) can be treated by proton pump inhibitors, topical corticosteroids, or dietary measures. This study systematically assessed the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) can be treated by proton pump inhibitors, topical corticosteroids, or dietary measures. This study systematically assessed the efficacy of 4 major dietary treatment regimens in EoE, updating the evidence presented in a meta-analysis from 2014.
METHODS
Electronic databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, and other sources were searched up to September 2022 to identify studies on dietary treatment of EoE. Based on histologic remission criteria, the efficacy of these treatments was pooled and analyzed with respect to the type of dietary regimen: 6-food elimination diet (SFED), 4-food elimination diet (FFED), 1-food elimination diet (OFED), and a targeted elimination diet (TED). Clinical response rates, food sensitization, and efficacies for a pediatric subpopulation were calculated. Influencing variables on efficacies were estimated via meta-regression analyses.
RESULTS
Thirty-four studies with 1762 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall rate of histologic remission was 53.8% (95% CI, 48.0%-59.6%), and in the individual dietary groups was 61.3% (95% CI, 53.0%-69.3%) for SFED, 49.4% (95% CI, 32.5%-66.3%) for FFED, 51.4% (95% CI, 42.6%-60.1%) for OFED, and 45.7% (95% CI, 32.0%-59.7%) for TED. Dietary regimen and patient age did not significantly affect rates of histologic remission. The overall rate of clinical response was 80.8% (95% CI, 72.3%-88.2%), with response rates of 92.8% (95% CI, 81.2%-99.6%) for SFED, 74.1% (95% CI, 49.8%-92.6%) for FFED, 87.1% (95% CI, 58.4%-99.9%) for OFED, and 69.0% (95% CI, 50.2%85.3%) for TED.
CONCLUSIONS
Dietary therapy is an effective treatment for EoE patients of any age. The current results could support a trend toward less-restrictive dietary regimens as a primary treatment option.
Topics: Child; Humans; Allergens; Diet; Elimination Diets; Eosinophilic Esophagitis; Food; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36731591
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2023.01.019 -
The American Journal of Medicine Oct 2022The role of antisecretory drugs for the prevention of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients using anticoagulants is unclear. We investigated this question in a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The role of antisecretory drugs for the prevention of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients using anticoagulants is unclear. We investigated this question in a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov thru April 2021 for controlled randomized trials and observational studies evaluating the association of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or H2-receptor antagonists with overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients using anticoagulants. Independent duplicate review, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed. Observational studies were included only if they provided results controlled for at least 2 variables. Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models.
RESULTS
Six observational studies and 1 randomized trial were included. All but 1 study had low risk of bias. None of the studies excluded patients with concomitant aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. For PPIs, the pooled relative risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding was 0.67 (95% confidence interval 0.61, 0.74) with low statistical heterogeneity (I = 15%). Individual studies showed greater treatment effect in patients with higher risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (eg, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or aspirin use, elevated bleeding risk score). A single observational study evaluating the association of H2-receptor antagonists with upper gastrointestinal bleeding found a relative risk of 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.24-2.02).
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence drawn mostly from observational studies with low risk of bias demonstrate that PPIs reduce upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients prescribed oral anticoagulants. The benefit appears to be most clearcut and substantial in patients with elevated risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anticoagulants; Aspirin; Gastrointestinal Agents; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Histamine H2 Antagonists; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 35679879
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2022.05.031 -
Digestion 2023Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has a strong acid suppression effect and potent efficacy in acid-associated diseases, including Helicobacter... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, has a strong acid suppression effect and potent efficacy in acid-associated diseases, including Helicobacter pylori eradication. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy for H. pylori eradication.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature search through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to June 2022, to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy and triple therapies for H. pylori eradication. Primary outcomes were cure rates and relative efficacy. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, dropout rate, and subgroup analysis.
RESULTS
Five studies with 1,852 patients were included in the analysis. The cure rates of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy were 85.6% with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 79.7-91.5% and 88.5% (95% CI: 83.2-93.8%) in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. The efficacy of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy was not inferior to that of triple therapy with pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.03 (95% CI: 0.97-1.10) and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.98-1.08) in intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses; while it was significantly superior to the omeprazole or lansoprazole-based triple therapy (RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05-1.25, p = 0.001). For clarithromycin-resistant strains, vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy showed superiority to vonoprazan-based triple therapy (86.7% vs. 71.4%, RR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.03-1.39, p = 0.02); however, vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy was significant inferior to vonoprazan-based triple therapy for clarithromycin-sensitive strains (83.0% vs. 92.8%, RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.95, p = 0.0002). The adverse effects of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy were lower than those of triple therapy (21.2% vs. 26.5%, RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.01, p = 0.06), especially the incidence of diarrhea (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy of vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy is noninferior to vonoprazan-based triple therapy but superior to the omeprazole or lansoprazole-based triple therapy and has less side effects. Patients with clarithromycin-resistant strains are particularly expected to benefit from vonoprazan/amoxicillin dual therapy.
Topics: Humans; Amoxicillin; Clarithromycin; Helicobacter pylori; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Helicobacter Infections; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Pyrroles; Lansoprazole; Omeprazole; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37015201
DOI: 10.1159/000529622 -
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk... 2023Levothyroxine is a common prescribed drug. Many medications and food, however, can interfere with its bioavailability. The aim of this review was to summarize the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Levothyroxine is a common prescribed drug. Many medications and food, however, can interfere with its bioavailability. The aim of this review was to summarize the medications, food and beverages that interact with levothyroxine and to assess their effects, mechanisms and treatments.
METHODS
A systematic review on interfering substances that interact with levothyroxine was performed. Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane library, grey literature from other sources and the lists of references were searched for human studies comparing the levothyroxine efficacy with and without interfering substances. The patient characteristics, drug classes, effects and mechanism were extracted. The NHLBI study quality assessment tools and the JBI critical appraisal checklist were used to assess the quality of included studies.
RESULTS
A total of 107 articles with 128 studies were included. Drugs interactions were revealed in calcium and iron supplements, proton pump inhibitors, bile acid sequestrants, phosphate binders, sex hormones, anticonvulsants and other drugs. Some food and beverage could also induce malabsorption. Proposed mechanisms included direct complexing, alkalization, alteration of serum thyroxine-binding globulin levels and acceleration of levothyroxine catabolism via deiodination. Dose adjustment, administration separation and discontinuation of interfering substances can eliminate the interactions. Liquid solutions and soft-gel capsules could eliminate the malabsorption due to chelation and alkalization. The qualities of most included studies were moderate.
CONCLUSION
Lots of medications and food can impair the bioavailability of levothyroxine. Clinicians, patients and pharmaceutical companies should be aware of the possible interactions. Further well-designed studies are needed to provide more solid evidence on treatment and mechanisms.
PubMed: 37384019
DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S414460 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023Cancer is a major global health concern, and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) offer a promising treatment option for cancer patients. However, the efficacy of ICIs...
INTRODUCTION
Cancer is a major global health concern, and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) offer a promising treatment option for cancer patients. However, the efficacy of ICIs can be influenced by various factors, including the use of concomitant medications.
METHODS
We searched databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science) for systematic reviews and meta-analyses for systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the impact of concomitant medications on ICIs efficacy, published from inception to January 1, 2023. We evaluated the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses, and re-synthesized data using a random-effects model and evidence stratification.
RESULTS
We included 23 publications, comprising 11 concomitant medications and 112 associations. Class II-IV evidence suggested that antibiotics have a negative impact on ICIs efficacy. However, ICIs efficacy against melanoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma was not affected, this effect was related to the exposure window (class IV). Class III evidence suggested that proton pump inhibitors have a negative impact on ICIs efficacy; nevertheless, the efficacy against melanoma and renal cell carcinoma was not affected, and the effect was related to exposure before the initiation of ICIs therapy (class II). Although class II/III evidence suggested that steroids have a negative impact, this effect was not observed when used for non-cancer indications and immune-related adverse events (class IV). Class IV evidence suggested that opioids reduce ICIs efficacy, whereas statins and probiotics may improve ICIs efficacy. ICIs efficacy was not affected by histamine 2 receptor antagonists, aspirin, metformin, β-blockers, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents.
CONCLUSION
Current evidence suggests that the use of antibiotics, PPIs, steroids, and opioids has a negative impact on the efficacy of ICIs. However, this effect may vary depending on the type of tumor, the timing of exposure, and the intended application. Weak evidence suggests that statins and probiotics may enhance the efficacy of ICIs. Aspirin, metformin, β-blockers, and NSAIDs do not appear to affect the efficacy of ICIs. However, caution is advised in interpreting these results due to methodological limitations.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO,identifier, CRD42022328681.
Topics: Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Aspirin; Esophageal Neoplasms; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Kidney Neoplasms; Liver Neoplasms; Melanoma; Metformin; Steroids; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Meta-Analysis as Topic
PubMed: 37841249
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1218386 -
Cureus Oct 2023Our comprehensive systematic review aimed to examine gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a disorder that occurs when stomach contents flow back into the esophagus.... (Review)
Review
Our comprehensive systematic review aimed to examine gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a disorder that occurs when stomach contents flow back into the esophagus. It may manifest as either non-erosive reflux disease or erosive esophagitis. The activity depicts the assessment and medical management of GERD and emphasizes the interprofessional team's involvement to enhance care for people with this ailment. Data sources were PubMed/Medline and Embase. Our review investigated English-language articles (from 2014 to 2023) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Overall, there were seven articles. Surveys and analyses of national databases were the most widely used methods (n=7). The search identified 3,730 studies, and seven were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. Further understanding of GERD and treatment protocols may help improve evaluation and management in the future. Millions of individuals worldwide suffer from GERD, a common clinical condition. Patients can be identified by symptoms that are both common and uncommon. For many GERD patients, acid suppression treatment reduces symptoms and avoids clinical complications. Our capacity to recognize and treat disease consequences has improved with the advancement of diagnostic and treatment methods. Here, we go into the etiology and consequences of GERD and offer details on the treatment strategy for this prevalent illness.
PubMed: 38022211
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.47420 -
Cureus Aug 2023Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated condition characterized by inflammation and eosinophilic accumulation of the esophagus, resulting in... (Review)
Review
Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune-mediated condition characterized by inflammation and eosinophilic accumulation of the esophagus, resulting in dysphagia and food impaction. While the exact etiology of EoE remains unclear, it is believed to be triggered by food allergens and dynamic environmental factors, resulting in various clinical manifestations, from inflammation to fibrosis. Although clinical presentation varies with age, the number of eosinophils in esophagogastroduodenal endoscopy remains the diagnostic gold standard. While diet elimination, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), topical corticosteroids, and biological therapy are promising treatment options for EoE, there are insufficient data to determine the optimal therapeutic treatment approach. Combination therapies - the use of dietary therapies in conjunction with other treatment modalities, such as PPIs, topical corticosteroids, or biologic agents - have also emerged as a potential management strategy for EoE. In this systematic review, we attempt to highlight the recent advances in EoE therapies and provide updated guidance to their management. From 2017 to 2022, we conducted a comprehensive electronic search of PubMed (MEDLINE) using specific keywords related to our objective and eventually included a total of 44 articles.
PubMed: 37692685
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.43221