Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period

Michelle E. Allen, Brian J. Kopp, Brian L Erstad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose. The implications of recent studies for guidelines that pertain to stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period are discussed. Summary. The therapeutic guidelines on stress ulcer prophylaxis published by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) provided clinicians with recommendations regarding appropriate candidates for stress ulcer prophylaxis and selection of a pharmacologic agent. Since these guidelines were published in 1999, additional research has been completed to resolve some of the controversial issues surrounding stress ulcer prophylaxis. The frequency of stress-induced bleeding in recent investigations continues to be highly variable, depending on the definition used to describe bleeding. In general, investigations that evaluate overt bleeding or bleeding without hemodynamic changes or blood transfusion report higher frequencies of bleeding than those that evaluate clinically important bleeding. Similar to that reported in the initial ASHP guidelines, the frequency of clinically important bleeding in recent investigations is low. In addition, the majority of recently published prospective studies and a meta-analysis have been unable to demonstrate a reduction in clinically important bleeding with pharmacologic agents. As a result, some experts have suggested that advances in critical care are more influential in the development of stress-induced bleeding than the use of pharmacologic agents. Recently published investigations support the effectiveness of institution-specific guidelines to help clinicians identify appropriate candidates for stress ulcer prophylaxis. The selection of an optimal pharmacologic agent for stress ulcer prophylaxis continues to be debated. The majority of recent studies have involved the administration of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs). In general, these studies have demonstrated that PPIs are at least as effective as histamine H2-receptor antagonists at increasing gastric pH, but adequately powered studies investigating the endpoint of clinically important bleeding are needed. Similar to the initial ASHP guidelines, the development of institution-specific guidelines is recommended to identify the most appropriate pharmacologic treatment. Conclusion. The frequency of clinically important bleeding reported in recent studies is low. The majority of recently published prospective studies and meta-analyses found little significant reduction in bleeding with pharmacologic prophylaxis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)588-596
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Health-System Pharmacy
Volume61
Issue number6
StatePublished - Mar 15 2004

Fingerprint

Postoperative Period
Ulcer
Hemorrhage
Guidelines
Proton Pump Inhibitors
Pharmacists
Meta-Analysis
Prospective Studies
Histamine H2 Antagonists
Health
Critical Care
Blood Transfusion
Stomach
Hemodynamics

Keywords

  • American Society of Health-System Pharmacists
  • Gastrointestinal agents
  • Protocols
  • Stress
  • Surgery
  • Ulcers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmaceutical Science
  • Leadership and Management

Cite this

Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period. / Allen, Michelle E.; Kopp, Brian J.; Erstad, Brian L.

In: American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, Vol. 61, No. 6, 15.03.2004, p. 588-596.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Allen, Michelle E. ; Kopp, Brian J. ; Erstad, Brian L. / Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period. In: American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2004 ; Vol. 61, No. 6. pp. 588-596.
@article{8f2a85b5dcbb4d258e27675e222cf70e,
title = "Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period",
abstract = "Purpose. The implications of recent studies for guidelines that pertain to stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period are discussed. Summary. The therapeutic guidelines on stress ulcer prophylaxis published by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) provided clinicians with recommendations regarding appropriate candidates for stress ulcer prophylaxis and selection of a pharmacologic agent. Since these guidelines were published in 1999, additional research has been completed to resolve some of the controversial issues surrounding stress ulcer prophylaxis. The frequency of stress-induced bleeding in recent investigations continues to be highly variable, depending on the definition used to describe bleeding. In general, investigations that evaluate overt bleeding or bleeding without hemodynamic changes or blood transfusion report higher frequencies of bleeding than those that evaluate clinically important bleeding. Similar to that reported in the initial ASHP guidelines, the frequency of clinically important bleeding in recent investigations is low. In addition, the majority of recently published prospective studies and a meta-analysis have been unable to demonstrate a reduction in clinically important bleeding with pharmacologic agents. As a result, some experts have suggested that advances in critical care are more influential in the development of stress-induced bleeding than the use of pharmacologic agents. Recently published investigations support the effectiveness of institution-specific guidelines to help clinicians identify appropriate candidates for stress ulcer prophylaxis. The selection of an optimal pharmacologic agent for stress ulcer prophylaxis continues to be debated. The majority of recent studies have involved the administration of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs). In general, these studies have demonstrated that PPIs are at least as effective as histamine H2-receptor antagonists at increasing gastric pH, but adequately powered studies investigating the endpoint of clinically important bleeding are needed. Similar to the initial ASHP guidelines, the development of institution-specific guidelines is recommended to identify the most appropriate pharmacologic treatment. Conclusion. The frequency of clinically important bleeding reported in recent studies is low. The majority of recently published prospective studies and meta-analyses found little significant reduction in bleeding with pharmacologic prophylaxis.",
keywords = "American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, Gastrointestinal agents, Protocols, Stress, Surgery, Ulcers",
author = "Allen, {Michelle E.} and Kopp, {Brian J.} and Erstad, {Brian L}",
year = "2004",
month = "3",
day = "15",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "61",
pages = "588--596",
journal = "American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy",
issn = "1079-2082",
publisher = "American Society of Health-Systems Pharmacy",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period

AU - Allen, Michelle E.

AU - Kopp, Brian J.

AU - Erstad, Brian L

PY - 2004/3/15

Y1 - 2004/3/15

N2 - Purpose. The implications of recent studies for guidelines that pertain to stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period are discussed. Summary. The therapeutic guidelines on stress ulcer prophylaxis published by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) provided clinicians with recommendations regarding appropriate candidates for stress ulcer prophylaxis and selection of a pharmacologic agent. Since these guidelines were published in 1999, additional research has been completed to resolve some of the controversial issues surrounding stress ulcer prophylaxis. The frequency of stress-induced bleeding in recent investigations continues to be highly variable, depending on the definition used to describe bleeding. In general, investigations that evaluate overt bleeding or bleeding without hemodynamic changes or blood transfusion report higher frequencies of bleeding than those that evaluate clinically important bleeding. Similar to that reported in the initial ASHP guidelines, the frequency of clinically important bleeding in recent investigations is low. In addition, the majority of recently published prospective studies and a meta-analysis have been unable to demonstrate a reduction in clinically important bleeding with pharmacologic agents. As a result, some experts have suggested that advances in critical care are more influential in the development of stress-induced bleeding than the use of pharmacologic agents. Recently published investigations support the effectiveness of institution-specific guidelines to help clinicians identify appropriate candidates for stress ulcer prophylaxis. The selection of an optimal pharmacologic agent for stress ulcer prophylaxis continues to be debated. The majority of recent studies have involved the administration of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs). In general, these studies have demonstrated that PPIs are at least as effective as histamine H2-receptor antagonists at increasing gastric pH, but adequately powered studies investigating the endpoint of clinically important bleeding are needed. Similar to the initial ASHP guidelines, the development of institution-specific guidelines is recommended to identify the most appropriate pharmacologic treatment. Conclusion. The frequency of clinically important bleeding reported in recent studies is low. The majority of recently published prospective studies and meta-analyses found little significant reduction in bleeding with pharmacologic prophylaxis.

AB - Purpose. The implications of recent studies for guidelines that pertain to stress ulcer prophylaxis in the postoperative period are discussed. Summary. The therapeutic guidelines on stress ulcer prophylaxis published by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) provided clinicians with recommendations regarding appropriate candidates for stress ulcer prophylaxis and selection of a pharmacologic agent. Since these guidelines were published in 1999, additional research has been completed to resolve some of the controversial issues surrounding stress ulcer prophylaxis. The frequency of stress-induced bleeding in recent investigations continues to be highly variable, depending on the definition used to describe bleeding. In general, investigations that evaluate overt bleeding or bleeding without hemodynamic changes or blood transfusion report higher frequencies of bleeding than those that evaluate clinically important bleeding. Similar to that reported in the initial ASHP guidelines, the frequency of clinically important bleeding in recent investigations is low. In addition, the majority of recently published prospective studies and a meta-analysis have been unable to demonstrate a reduction in clinically important bleeding with pharmacologic agents. As a result, some experts have suggested that advances in critical care are more influential in the development of stress-induced bleeding than the use of pharmacologic agents. Recently published investigations support the effectiveness of institution-specific guidelines to help clinicians identify appropriate candidates for stress ulcer prophylaxis. The selection of an optimal pharmacologic agent for stress ulcer prophylaxis continues to be debated. The majority of recent studies have involved the administration of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs). In general, these studies have demonstrated that PPIs are at least as effective as histamine H2-receptor antagonists at increasing gastric pH, but adequately powered studies investigating the endpoint of clinically important bleeding are needed. Similar to the initial ASHP guidelines, the development of institution-specific guidelines is recommended to identify the most appropriate pharmacologic treatment. Conclusion. The frequency of clinically important bleeding reported in recent studies is low. The majority of recently published prospective studies and meta-analyses found little significant reduction in bleeding with pharmacologic prophylaxis.

KW - American Society of Health-System Pharmacists

KW - Gastrointestinal agents

KW - Protocols

KW - Stress

KW - Surgery

KW - Ulcers

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2342447376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=2342447376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 15061430

AN - SCOPUS:2342447376

VL - 61

SP - 588

EP - 596

JO - American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

JF - American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

SN - 1079-2082

IS - 6

ER -