Pharmacological interventions for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in people admitted to intensive care units: a network meta-analysis

TOEWS, Ingrid, Mohammad Salman HUSSAIN, John L Z NYIRENDA, Maria A WILLIS, Lucia HASONOVÁ, Simona SLEZAKOVA, Minyahil Tadesse BOLTENA, Peter John VICTOR, Luis Eduardo Santos FONTES, Miloslav KLUGAR, Behnam SADEGHIRAD and Joerg J MEERPOHL. Pharmacological interventions for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in people admitted to intensive care units: a network meta-analysis. BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE. London: BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2024, 14 pp. ISSN 2515-446X. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2024-112886.

Basic information

• Original name: Pharmacological interventions for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in people admitted to intensive care units: a network meta-analysis
• Authors: TOEWS, Ingrid, Mohammad Salman HUSSAIN, John L Z NYIRENDA, Maria A WILLIS, Lucia HASONOVÁ, Simona SLEZAKOVA, Minyahil Tadesse BOLTENA, Peter John VICTOR, Luis Eduardo Santos FONTES, Miloslav KLUGAR, Behnam SADEGHIRAD and Joerg J MEERPOHL.
• Edition: BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE, London, BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2024, 2515-446X.

Other information

• Original language: English
• Type of outcome: Article in a journal
• Country of publisher: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
• Confidentiality degree: is not subject to a state or trade secret
• WWW: URL
• Impact factor: Impact factor: 5.800 in 2022
• Organization unit: Faculty of Medicine
• Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2024-112886
• UT WoS: 001270955700001
• Keywords in English: Systematic Reviews as Topic; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Hematology
• Tags: 14119612, 14119613
• Tags: International impact, Reviewed

Abstract

Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for preventing upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in people admitted to intensive care units (ICUs).Design and setting Systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis using standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane for screening of records, data extraction and analysis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.Participants Randomised controlled trials involving patients admitted to ICUs for longer than 24 hours were included.Search methods The Cochrane Gut Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database (LILACS) databases were searched from August 2017 to March 2022. The search in MEDLINE was updated in April 2023. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP).Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the prevention of clinically important upper GI bleeding.Results We included 123 studies with 46 996 participants. Cimetidine (relative risk (RR) 0.56, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.77, moderate certainty), ranitidine (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.76, moderate certainty), antacids (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.68, moderate certainty), sucralfate (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.75, moderate certainty) and a combination of ranitidine and antacids (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.62, moderate certainty) are likely effective in preventing upper GI bleeding. The effect of any intervention on the prevention of nosocomial pneumonia, all-cause mortality in the ICU or the hospital, duration of the stay in the ICU, duration of intubation and (serious) adverse events remains unclear.Results We included 123 studies with 46 996 participants. Cimetidine (relative risk (RR) 0.56, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.77, moderate certainty), ranitidine (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.76, moderate certainty), antacids (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.68, moderate certainty), sucralfate (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.75, moderate certainty) and a combination of ranitidine and antacids (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.62, moderate certainty) are likely effective in preventing upper GI bleeding. The effect of any intervention on the prevention of nosocomial pneumonia, all-cause mortality in the ICU or the hospital, duration of the stay in the ICU, duration of intubation and (serious) adverse events remains unclear.Conclusions Several interventions seem effective in preventing clinically important upper GI bleeding while there is limited evidence for other outcomes. Patient-relevant benefits and harms need to be assessed under consideration of the patients' underlying conditions.