Suppr超能文献

荟萃分析:比较质子泵抑制剂口服与静脉给药治疗消化性溃疡出血的效果。

Meta-analysis: comparison of oral vs. intravenous proton pump inhibitors in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding.

机构信息

The Institute of Digestive Disease, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.

出版信息

Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013 Oct;38(7):721-8. doi: 10.1111/apt.12441. Epub 2013 Aug 5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of adjuvant use of intravenous proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) after endoscopic therapy has been proved in peptic ulcer bleeding patients, but the efficacy of oral PPIs is uncertain.

AIM

To compare the clinical outcomes of oral PPIs vs. intravenous PPIs in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding.

METHODS

Prospective randomised controlled trials were systematically searched from OVID databases until June 2012. Trials comparing oral and intravenous PPIs among patients with peptic ulcer bleeding were included. Recurrent bleeding, length of hospitalisation, blood transfusion, requirement of surgery and mortality were measured. The risk of bias, study quality and heterogeneity were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Six randomised trials from 2006 to 2011 were included. A total of 615 patients were randomly assigned to receive oral PPIs (n = 302) or intravenous PPIs (n = 313). The mean age was 60 years and 71.1% was male. No significant difference between oral and intravenous PPIs was observed regarding recurrent bleeding (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.56-1.50), mean volume of blood transfused (-0.02 unit, 95% CI: -0.29-0.24 unit), requirement of surgery (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.19-3.61) and all-cause mortality (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.29-2.71). The duration of hospital stay in days was significantly shortened in those using oral PPIs (-0.74 day, 95% CI: -1.10 day to -0.39 day).

CONCLUSION

Oral PPIs demonstrate a similar effectiveness to intravenous PPIs among patients with peptic ulcer bleeding, but the results were combined from open-labelled trials with limited sample size. A large double-blind non-inferiority trial is required to better assess the role of oral PPIs.

摘要

背景

质子泵抑制剂(PPIs)辅助内镜治疗消化性溃疡出血已被证实有效,但口服 PPI 的疗效尚不确定。

目的

比较口服 PPI 与静脉用 PPI 治疗消化性溃疡出血患者的临床结局。

方法

系统检索 OVID 数据库,收集 2012 年 6 月前发表的比较口服和静脉用 PPI 治疗消化性溃疡出血的前瞻性随机对照试验。观察指标包括再出血率、住院时间、输血、手术需求和死亡率。评价研究的偏倚风险、方法学质量和异质性。

结果

纳入 2006 年至 2011 年发表的 6 项随机对照试验,共 615 例患者被随机分配至口服 PPI 组(n = 302)或静脉用 PPI 组(n = 313)。患者平均年龄 60 岁,71.1%为男性。两组再出血率(RR:0.92,95%CI:0.56-1.50)、平均输血量(-0.02 单位,95%CI:-0.29-0.24 单位)、手术需求(RR:0.82,95%CI:0.19-3.61)和全因死亡率(RR:0.88,95%CI:0.29-2.71)差异均无统计学意义。但口服 PPI 组患者住院时间较静脉用 PPI 组缩短(-0.74 天,95%CI:-1.10 天至-0.39 天)。

结论

口服 PPI 与静脉用 PPI 治疗消化性溃疡出血的疗效相似,但现有研究均为开放标签试验,样本量有限。需要开展更大规模的双盲非劣效性试验以更好地评估口服 PPI 的作用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验