23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Advantages and Disadvantages of Long-term Proton Pump Inhibitor Use

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) potently inhibit gastric acid secretion and are widely used for treatment of acid-related diseases including gastroesophageal reflux disease and secondary prevention of aspirin/NSAID-induced ulcers. Although clinically important adverse effects of PPIs can occur, just as with other drugs, those are not frequently observed during or after administration. Thus, PPIs are regarded as relatively safe and considered to be clinically beneficial. Recently, PPIs have become frequently administered to patients with functional gastrointestinal diseases or primary prevention of drug-related gastroduodenal damage, even though their beneficial effects for those conditions have not been fully confirmed. PPIs tend to be given for conditions in which the necessity of the drug has not been clarified, thus otherwise rare adverse effects are presented as clinically relevant. Although several PPI-related adverse effects have been reported, their clinical relevance is not yet clear, since the evidence reported in those studies is not at a high enough level, as the majority are based on retrospective observational studies and the reported hazard ratios are low. It is important to administer PPIs only for patients who will gain a substantial clinical benefit and to continue to investigate their adverse effects with high quality prospective studies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references114

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Clopidogrel with or without omeprazole in coronary artery disease.

          Gastrointestinal complications are an important problem of antithrombotic therapy. Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are believed to decrease the risk of such complications, though no randomized trial has proved this in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. Recently, concerns have been raised about the potential for PPIs to blunt the efficacy of clopidogrel. We randomly assigned patients with an indication for dual antiplatelet therapy to receive clopidogrel in combination with either omeprazole or placebo, in addition to aspirin. The primary gastrointestinal end point was a composite of overt or occult bleeding, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcers or erosions, obstruction, or perforation. The primary cardiovascular end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, revascularization, or stroke. The trial was terminated prematurely when the sponsor lost financing. We planned to enroll about 5000 patients; a total of 3873 were randomly assigned and 3761 were included in analyses. In all, 51 patients had a gastrointestinal event; the event rate was 1.1% with omeprazole and 2.9% with placebo at 180 days (hazard ratio with omeprazole, 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.63; P<0.001). The rate of overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding was also reduced with omeprazole as compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.56; P = 0.001). A total of 109 patients had a cardiovascular event, with event rates of 4.9% with omeprazole and 5.7% with placebo (hazard ratio with omeprazole, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.44; P = 0.96); high-risk subgroups did not show significant heterogeneity. The two groups did not differ significantly in the rate of serious adverse events, though the risk of diarrhea was increased with omeprazole. Among patients receiving aspirin and clopidogrel, prophylactic use of a PPI reduced the rate of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. There was no apparent cardiovascular interaction between clopidogrel and omeprazole, but our results do not rule out a clinically meaningful difference in cardiovascular events due to use of a PPI. (Funded by Cogentus Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00557921.).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, as a component of first-line and second-line triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication: a phase III, randomised, double-blind study

            Objective The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of vonoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, as a component of Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy. Design A randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group study was conducted to verify the non-inferiority of vonoprazan 20 mg to lansoprazole 30 mg as part of first-line triple therapy (with amoxicillin 750 mg and clarithromycin 200 or 400 mg) in H pylori-positive patients with gastric or duodenal ulcer history. The first 50 patients failing first-line therapy with good compliance also received second-line vonoprazan-based triple therapy (with amoxicillin 750 mg and metronidazole 250 mg) as an open-label treatment. Results Of the 650 subjects randomly allocated to either first-line triple therapy, 641 subjects completed first-line therapy and 50 subjects completed second-line therapy. The first-line eradication rate (primary end point) was 92.6% (95% CI 89.2% to 95.2%) with vonoprazan versus 75.9% (95% CI 70.9% to 80.5%) with lansoprazole, with the difference being 16.7% (95% CI 11.2% to 22.1%) in favour of vonoprazan, thus confirming the non-inferiority of vonoprazan (p<0.0001). The second-line eradication rate (secondary end point) was also high (98.0%; 95% CI 89.4% to 99.9%) in those who received second-line therapy (n=50). Both first-line triple therapies were well tolerated with no notable differences. Second-line triple therapy was also well tolerated. Conclusion Vonoprazan is effective as part of first-line triple therapy and as part of second-line triple therapy in H pylori-positive patients with a history of gastric or duodenal ulcer. Trial registration number NCT01505127.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Risk of adverse outcomes associated with concomitant use of clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors following acute coronary syndrome.

              Prior mechanistic studies reported that omeprazole decreases the platelet inhibitory effects of clopidogrel, yet the clinical significance of these findings is not clear. To assess outcomes of patients taking clopidogrel with or without a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) after hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Retrospective cohort study of 8205 patients with ACS taking clopidogrel after discharge from 127 Veterans Affairs hospitals between October 1, 2003, and January 31, 2006. Vital status information was available for all patients through September 30, 2006. All-cause mortality or rehospitalization for ACS. Of 8205 patients taking clopidogrel after discharge, 63.9% (n = 5244) were prescribed PPI at discharge, during follow-up, or both and 36.1% (n = 2961) were not prescribed PPI. Death or rehospitalization for ACS occurred in 20.8% (n = 615) of patients taking clopidogrel without PPI and 29.8% (n = 1561) of patients taking clopidogrel plus PPI. In multivariable analyses, use of clopidogrel plus PPI was associated with an increased risk of death or rehospitalization for ACS compared with use of clopidogrel without PPI (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.41). Among patients taking clopidogrel after hospital discharge and prescribed PPI at any point during follow-up (n = 5244), periods of use of clopidogrel plus PPI (compared with periods of use of clopidogrel without PPI) were associated with a higher risk of death or rehospitalization for ACS (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.10-1.46). In analyses of secondary outcomes, patients taking clopidogrel plus PPI had a higher risk of hospitalizations for recurrent ACS compared with patients taking clopidogrel without PPI (14.6% vs 6.9%; AOR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.57-2.20]) and revascularization procedures (15.5% vs 11.9%; AOR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.30-1.71]), but not for all-cause mortality (19.9% vs 16.6%; AOR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.80-1.05]). The association between use of clopidogrel plus PPI and increased risk of adverse outcomes also was consistent using a nested case-control study design (AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.14-1.54). In addition, use of PPI without clopidogrel was not associated with death or rehospitalization for ACS among patients not taking clopidogrel after hospital discharge (n = 6450) (AOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85-1.13). Concomitant use of clopidogrel and PPI after hospital discharge for ACS was associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes than use of clopidogrel without PPI, suggesting that use of PPI may be associated with attenuation of benefits of clopidogrel after ACS.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Neurogastroenterol Motil
                J Neurogastroenterol Motil
                Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility
                Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility
                2093-0879
                2093-0887
                April 2018
                01 April 2018
                : 24
                : 2
                : 182-196
                Affiliations
                Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Shimane University School of Medicine, Shimane, Japan
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: Yoshikazu Kinoshita, MD, PhD Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Shimane University School of Medicine, 89-1, Enya-cho, Izumo-shi, Shimane 693-8501, Japan, Tel: +81-853-20-2190, Fax: +81-853-20-2187, E-mail: kinosita@ 123456med.shimane-u.ac.jp
                Article
                jnm-24-182
                10.5056/jnm18001
                5885718
                29605975
                c50562ae-9bad-4021-8e7f-21e7d2187cab
                © 2018 The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 08 January 2018
                : 28 January 2018
                : 09 February 2018
                Categories
                Review

                Neurology
                adverse effect,allergic disease,gastric acid,gastroesophageal reflux,ulcer
                Neurology
                adverse effect, allergic disease, gastric acid, gastroesophageal reflux, ulcer

                Comments

                Comment on this article