DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/jbtr.v8i3.16387

Rationality of Use and Effectiveness of Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients: An Experience from A Tertiary Intensive Care Unit

1Division of Gastroenterohepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia

2Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia

3Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia

Received: 17 Nov 2022; Revised: 19 Dec 2022; Accepted: 15 Dec 2022; Available online: 30 Dec 2022; Published: 30 Dec 2022.
Open Access Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Background: Stress-related mucosal disease (SRMD) frequently develops in critically ill patients, increasing mortality and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. There is limited data on stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) on critically ill patients in Indonesia.

Objective:

Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the ICU from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017. The subjects were all ICU patients who used proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) as SUP therapy.

Results: A total of 315 patients were included, and mean age was 48 years. Approximately 55.2% were women, and 62.8% of patients were admitted to ICU following high-risk surgery. PPI was given to 187 patients (59.4%) and H2RA to 128 patients (40.6%), with an average usage for 5 days. The incidence of SRMD was 15.9% (n = 50), and mean length of stay in the ICU was 6 days. Gender, age, duration of SUP, and ICU length of stay of the PPI and H2RA groups were not statistically different (p > 0.05) and did not affect the GI event (p > 0.05). The use of rational SUP was 98.4%. Major American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) risk factor criterion was ventilator use (86.8%), while the minor ASHP criterion was anticoagulant therapy (22.2%). The incidence of GI event was significantly lower in PPI groups than H2RA groups (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: The use of SUP is rational with an average use of 5 days. PPI are superior to H2RA for SRMD prophylaxis.

Note: This article has supplementary file(s).

Fulltext View|Download |  Research Instrument
Ethical Clearance
Subject
Type Research Instrument
  Download (114KB)    Indexing metadata
 Copyright Transfer Agreement
Conflict of Interest and CTA
Subject
Type Copyright Transfer Agreement
  Download (402KB)    Indexing metadata
 Cover Letter
Cover Letter
Subject
Type Cover Letter
  Download (17KB)    Indexing metadata
Keywords: upper gastrointestinal bleeding; critically ill; risk factors; proton pump inhibitor; ICU

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Research Articles
Language : EN
Recent articles
Hepatogomax Improves Serum Albumin and Transaminase Enzyme Activity Levels in Sprague Dawley Rats Liver Cirrhosis Rationality of Use and Effectiveness of Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Critically Ill Patients: An Experience from A Tertiary Intensive Care Unit Cigarette Smoke Exposure, but Not High Fat Diet, is Able to Induce Atherosclerosis in Wild-Type Rats Cervical Leiomyoma in Pre-Menopausal Woman: A Case Report Genetic Counseling in a Couple with Primary Infertility More recent articles
  1. Bardou M, Quenot JP, Barkun A. Stress-related mucosal disease in the critically ill patient. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol [Internet]. 2015;12(2):98–107. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrgastro.2014.235
  2. Kodadek LM, Jones C. Stress gastritis and stress ulcers: Prevention and treatment. Surg Crit Care Ther A Clin Oriented Pract Approach [Internet]. 2018;231–9. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71712-
  3. Frandah W, Colmer-Hamood J, Nugent K, Raj R. Patterns of use of prophylaxis for stress-related mucosal disease in patients admitted to the intensive care unit. J Intensive Care Med [Internet]. 2014;29(2):96–103. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0885066612453542
  4. Krag M, Perner A, Wetterslev J, Wise MP, Borthwick M, Bendel S, et al. Prevalence and outcome of gastrointestinal bleeding and use of acid suppressants in acutely ill adult intensive care patients. Intensive Care Med [Internet]. 2015;41(5):833–45. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-015-3725-1
  5. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med [Internet]. 2013;39(2):165–228. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8
  6. Armstrong TA, Coursin DB, Devlin J, Duke JS, Fish D, Gonzalez ER, et al. ASHP therapeutic guidelines on stress ulcer prophylaxis. Am J Heal Pharm [Internet]. 1999;56(4):347–79. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/56.4.347
  7. Cook D, Guyatt G. Prophylaxis against Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Hospitalized Patients. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2018;378(26):2506–16. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/nejmra1605507
  8. Alshamsi F, Belley-Cote E, Cook D, Almenawer SA, Alqahtani Z, Perri D, et al. Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Crit Care [Internet]. 2016;20(1). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-016-1305-6
  9. Krag M, Perner A, Møller MH. Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the intensive care unit. Curr Opin Crit Care [Internet]. 2016;22(2):186–90. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000000290
  10. Buendgens L, Alexander Koch, Tacke F. Prevention of stress-related ulcer bleeding at the intensive care unit: Risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis. World J Crit Care Med [Internet]. 2016;5(1):57. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5492/wjccm.v5.i1.57
  11. Young PJ, Bagshaw SM, Forbes AB, Nichol AD, Wright SE, Bailey M, et al. Effect of Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis with Proton Pump Inhibitors vs Histamine-2 Receptor Blockers on In-Hospital Mortality among ICU Patients Receiving Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: The PEPTIC Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc [Internet]. 2020;323(7):616–26. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.22190
  12. Franchitti M, Piubellini J, Sadeghipour F, Eckert P, Voirol P, Schneider AG. Adequacy of stress ulcer prophylaxis prescription in the intensive care unit: An observational study. Swiss Med Wkly [Internet]. 2020;150(36):1–8. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4414/smw.2020.20322
  13. Mutlu GM, Mutlu EA, Factor P. GI complications in patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Rev [Internet]. 2001;119(4):1222–41. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1378/chest.119.4.1222
  14. Ali T, Harty RF. Stress-Induced Ulcer Bleeding in Critically Ill Patients. Gastroenterol Clin North Am [Internet]. 2009;38(2):245–65. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gtc.2009.03.002
  15. Alhazzani W, Alenezi F, Jaeschke RZ, Moayyedi P, Cook DJ. Proton pump inhibitors versus histamine 2 receptor antagonists for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med [Internet]. 2013;41(3):693–705. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182758734
  16. Finkenstedt A, Berger MM, Joannidis M. Stress ulcer prophylaxis: Is mortality a useful endpoint? Intensive Care Med [Internet]. 2020;46(11):2058–60. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06250-9
  17. Biyase N, Perrie H, Scribante J, Muteba M, Chetty S. Stress ulcer prophylaxis use in critical care units at public hospitals in Johannesburg, South Africa. South African J Crit Care [Internet]. 2021;37(1):16–20. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.7196/SAJCC.2021.V37I1.439
  18. Foroughinia F, Madhooshi M. Attachment to stress ulcer prophylaxis guideline in the neurology wards of two teaching and non-teaching hospitals: A retrospective survey in Iran. J Res Pharm Pract [Internet]. 2016;5(2):138. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2279-042x.179582
  19. Alqudah MAY, Al-Azzam S, Alzoubi K, Alkhatatbeh M, Rawashdeh N. Overuse of proton pump inhibitors for stress ulcer prophylaxis in Jordan. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther [Internet]. 2016;54(8):597–602. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5414/CP202533
  20. Barletta JF, Sclar DA. Use of proton pump inhibitors for the provision of stress ulcer prophylaxis: Clinical and economic consequences. Pharmacoeconomics [Internet]. 2014;32(1):5–13. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-013-0119-5
  21. Barletta JF, Bruno JJ, Buckley MS, Cook DJ. Stress ulcer prophylaxis. Crit Care Med [Internet]. 2016;44(7):1395–405. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000001872
  22. Bateman BT, Bykov K, Choudhry NK, Schneeweiss S, Gagne JJ, Polinski JM, et al. Type of stress ulcer prophylaxis and risk of nosocomial pneumonia in cardiac surgical patients: Cohort study. BMJ [Internet]. 2013;347(7927):1–14. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f5416
  23. Smith-Palmer J, Cerri K, Sbarigia U, Chan EK, Pollock RF, Valentine W, et al. Impact of Stigma on People Living with Chronic Hepatitis B. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2020;Volume 11:95–107

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.