1,042
Views
19
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Gastroenterology

Proton pump inhibitors for preventing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug induced gastrointestinal toxicity: a systematic review

, , , , , , , & show all
Pages 973-980 | Received 26 Oct 2016, Accepted 14 Dec 2016, Published online: 25 Jan 2017
 

Abstract

Objective: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are recommended for preventing gastrointestinal lesions induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). We performed this study: (1) to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PPIs, (2) to explore the association between effectiveness and potential influential factors, and (3) to investigate the comparative effect of different PPIs.

Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing different classes of PPIs, or comparing PPIs with placebo, H2 receptor antagonists or misoprostol in NSAIDs users. Both pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed.

Results: Analyses were based on 12,532 participants from 31 trials. PPIs were significantly more effective than placebo in reducing ulcer complications (relative risk [RR] = 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20 to 0.42) and endoscopic peptic ulcers (RR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.33), with no subgroup differences according to class of NSAIDs, ulcer risk, history of previous ulcer disease, Helicobacter pylori infection, or age. To prevent one ulcer complication, 10 high risk patients and 268 moderate risk patients need PPI therapy. Network meta-analysis indicated that the effectiveness of different PPIs in reducing ulcer complications and endoscopic peptic ulcers is generally similar. PPIs significantly reduced gastrointestinal adverse events and the related withdrawals compared to placebo; there is no difference in safety between different PPIs.

Conclusions: PPIs are effective and safe in preventing peptic ulcers and complications in a wide spectrum of patients requiring NSAID therapy. There is no major difference in the comparative effectiveness and safety between different PPIs.

Transparency

Declaration of funding

This study was not funded. Expedited services are paid for by the authors.

Author contributions: conception and design: M.Y. and P.L.; study selection: M.H., M.Y., and J.H.; data extraction and analysis: M.Y., M.Z., and P.L.; quality assessment: J.L. and L.L.; writing paper: M.Y. and Q.L.; manuscript revision B.Z., J.H., and P.L.

Declaration of financial/other relationships

M.Y., M.H., M.Z., B.Z., J.L., L.L., Q.L., J.H., and P.L. have disclosed that they have no significant relationships with or financial interests in any commercial companies related to this study or article.

CMRO peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial relationships to disclose.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 681.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.