Suzuki Jun, Sasabuchi Yusuke, Hatakeyama Shuji, Matsui Hiroki, Sasahara Teppei, Morisawa Yuji, Yamada Toshiyuki, Yasunaga Hideo
Division of Infectious Diseases, Jichi Medical University Hospital, 3311-1 Yakushiji, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, 329-0498 Japan.
Data Science Center, Jichi Medical University, 3311-1 Yakushiji, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, 329-0498 Japan.
J Intensive Care. 2020 Jul 31;8:56. doi: 10.1186/s40560-020-00473-0. eCollection 2020.
Studies have shown the potential benefit of stress ulcer prophylaxis including histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) and proton pump inhibitors (PPI) in critically ill patients. However, the adverse effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis such as infection (CDI) and hospital-acquired pneumonia have been reported. Abdominal septic shock is associated with increased risk of bleeding, CDI, and pneumonia; however, which ulcer prophylaxis might be associated with better outcomes in patients with septic shock after lower gastrointestinal tract perforation is unknown.
In this retrospective cohort study using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database from July 2010 to March 2015, we identified patients aged 18 years or older who received open abdominal surgery for lower gastrointestinal tract perforation and who used vasopressors and antibiotics within 2 days of admission. We performed propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to compare the outcomes between patients who received H2RA and those who received PPI within 2 days of admission. The outcomes included gastrointestinal bleeding requiring endoscopic hemostasis within 28 days of admission, 28-day mortality, CDI, and hospital-acquired pneumonia.
The propensity score matching created 1088 pairs of patients who received H2RA or PPI within 2 days of admission. There were no significant differences between the H2RA and PPI groups regarding gastrointestinal bleeding requiring endoscopic hemostasis within 28 days of admission (0.74% vs 1.3%, risk ratio 0.57 (0.24-1.4), and = 0.284), 28-day mortality (11.3% vs 12.9%, risk ratio 0.88 (0.68-1.1), and = 0.386), CDI (0.64% vs 0.46%, risk ratio 1.4 (0.45-4.4), and = 0.774), and hospital-acquired pneumonia (3.0% vs 4.3%, risk ratio 0.70 (0.45-1.1), and = 0.138). IPTW analysis showed similar results.
There were no significant differences in gastrointestinal bleeding requiring endoscopic hemostasis within 28 days of admission, 28-day mortality, CDI, and hospital-acquired pneumonia between H2RA and PPI in patients with septic shock after lower gastrointestinal tract perforation.
研究表明,应激性溃疡预防措施,包括组胺-2受体拮抗剂(H2RA)和质子泵抑制剂(PPI),对危重症患者有潜在益处。然而,应激性溃疡预防措施的不良反应,如感染(艰难梭菌感染)和医院获得性肺炎,已有报道。腹部感染性休克与出血、艰难梭菌感染和肺炎风险增加相关;然而,对于下消化道穿孔后感染性休克患者,哪种溃疡预防措施可能带来更好的预后尚不清楚。
在这项回顾性队列研究中,我们使用了2010年7月至2015年3月的日本诊断程序组合数据库,确定了年龄在18岁及以上、因下消化道穿孔接受开腹手术且在入院后2天内使用血管加压药和抗生素的患者。我们进行了倾向评分匹配和治疗权重逆概率(IPTW)分析,以比较入院后2天内接受H2RA治疗的患者和接受PPI治疗的患者的预后。结局指标包括入院后28天内需要内镜止血的胃肠道出血、28天死亡率、艰难梭菌感染和医院获得性肺炎。
倾向评分匹配产生了1088对在入院后2天内接受H2RA或PPI治疗的患者。H2RA组和PPI组在入院后28天内需要内镜止血的胃肠道出血方面(0.74%对1.3%,风险比0.57(0.24 - 1.4),P = 0.284)、28天死亡率方面(11.3%对12.9%,风险比0.88(0.68 - 1.1),P = 0.386)、艰难梭菌感染方面(0.64%对0.46%,风险比1.4(0.45 - 4.4),P = 0.774)以及医院获得性肺炎方面(3.0%对4.3%,风险比0.70(0.45 - 1.1),P = 0.138)均无显著差异。IPTW分析显示了相似的结果。
下消化道穿孔后感染性休克患者中,H2RA和PPI在入院后28天内需要内镜止血的胃肠道出血、28天死亡率、艰难梭菌感染和医院获得性肺炎方面无显著差异。