Evidence Hub

Proton pump inhibitors are not associated with fundic gland polyps - a systematic review that takes into consideration all known confounders

Lam SK, Lau GKK

European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, 2024

6,534 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Sporadic fundic gland polyps (FGPs) progress, albeit rarely, to dysplasia and cancer. Two meta-analyses, including 8 and 11 studies, concluded that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) were associated with FGPs. Intervention is considered unnecessary when FGPs have a background of PPIs use. Both meta-analyses, however, disregarded known confounders: age, sex, endoscopy indications, study design (prospective or retrospective), duration of PPI use, and H. pylori infection. Confounders are known to invalidate meta-analyses. We followed PRIXMA guidelines and searched the literature for studies on FGPs in PPI-users and PPI-nonusers. In the 22 studies searched, we compared FGPs in PPI-users (n = 6534) and PPI-nonusers (n = 41 115). Heterogeneity was significant (Cochran Q = 277.8, P 40 months, nor was it significantly different between PPI-users and PPI-nonusers within each duration period (P > 0.05). We conclude that PPIs are not associated with FGPs, implying that a background history of PPI use is not a justification for nonintervention in the management of FGPs.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 6,534 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free