Gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis for critically ill patients: a clinical practice guideline

Abstract Clinical question What is the role of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis (stress ulcer prophylaxis) in critically ill patients? This guideline was prompted by the publication of a new large randomised controlled trial. Current practice Gastric acid suppression with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) is commonly done to prevent gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients. Existing guidelines vary in their recommendations of which population to treat and which agent to use. Recommendations This guideline panel makes a weak recommendation for using gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients at high risk (>4%) of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, and a weak recommendation for not using prophylaxis in patients at lower risk of clinically important bleeding (≤4%). The panel identified risk categories based on evidence, with variable certainty regarding risk factors. The panel suggests using a PPI rather than a H2RA (weak recommendation) and recommends against using sucralfate (strong recommendation). How this guideline was created A guideline panel including patients, clinicians, and methodologists produced these recommendations using standards for trustworthy guidelines and the GRADE approach. The recommendations are based on a linked systematic review and network meta-analysis. A weak recommendation means that both options are reasonable. The evidence The linked systematic review and network meta-analysis estimated the benefit and harm of these medications in 12 660 critically ill patients in 72 trials. Both PPIs and H2RAs reduce the risk of clinically important bleeding. The effect is larger in patients at higher bleeding risk (those with a coagulopathy, chronic liver disease, or receiving mechanical ventilation but not enteral nutrition or two or more of mechanical ventilation with enteral nutrition, acute kidney injury, sepsis, and shock) (moderate certainty). PPIs and H2RAs might increase the risk of pneumonia (low certainty). They probably do not have an effect on mortality (moderate certainty), length of hospital stay, or any other important outcomes. PPIs probably reduce the risk of bleeding more than H2RAs (moderate certainty). Understanding the recommendation In most critically ill patients, the reduction in clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding from gastric acid suppressants is closely balanced with the possibility of pneumonia. Clinicians should consider individual patient values, risk of bleeding, and other factors such as medication availability when deciding whether to use gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis. Visual overviews provide the relative and absolute benefits and harms of the options in multilayered evidence summaries and decision aids available on MAGICapp.

[1]  W. Alhazzani,et al.  Predictors of gastrointestinal bleeding in adult ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2019, Intensive Care Medicine.

[2]  M. Wise,et al.  Pantoprazole in Patients at Risk for Gastrointestinal Bleeding in the ICU , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  Siddharth Singh,et al.  Association of Gastric Acid Suppression With Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis , 2017, JAMA internal medicine.

[4]  Alan E. Jones,et al.  Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016 , 2017, Intensive Care Medicine.

[5]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Introduction to BMJ Rapid Recommendations , 2016, British Medical Journal.

[6]  Y. Liu,et al.  Critical Appraisal of the Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis , 2016, PloS one.

[7]  D. Cook,et al.  Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the intensive care unit: an international survey of 97 units in 11 countries , 2015, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[8]  Sooyoung Shin Evaluation of costs accrued through inadvertent continuation of hospital-initiated proton pump inhibitor therapy for stress ulcer prophylaxis beyond hospital discharge: a retrospective chart review , 2015, Therapeutics and clinical risk management.

[9]  B. Erstad,et al.  Pharmacoepidemiology of stress ulcer prophylaxis in the United States and Canada. , 2014, Journal of critical care.

[10]  M. Møller,et al.  Guideline for stress ulcer prophylaxis in the intensive care unit. , 2014, Danish medical journal.

[11]  Gerald Gartlehner,et al.  [GRADE guidelines 15: going from evidence to recommendation - determinants of a recommendation's direction and strength]. , 2014, Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen.

[12]  David Rind,et al.  GRADE guidelines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation's direction and strength. , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[13]  N. Demartines,et al.  Stress ulcer prophylaxis in non-critically ill patients: a prospective evaluation of current practice in a general surgery department. , 2013, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[14]  G. Mercogliano,et al.  Overuse of stress ulcer prophylaxis in the critical care setting and beyond. , 2010, Journal of critical care.

[15]  C. Reimer,et al.  Proton-pump inhibitor therapy induces acid-related symptoms in healthy volunteers after withdrawal of therapy. , 2009, Gastroenterology.

[16]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Going from evidence to recommendations , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[17]  G. Guyatt,et al.  GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.