Evidence Hub

Risk of circulatory diseases associated with proton-pump inhibitors: a retrospective cohort study using electronic medical records in Thailand

Tanavij Pannoi, Chissanupong Promchai, Penjamaporn Apiromruck, Suwikran Wongpraphairot, Yaa‐Hui Dong, Chen‐Chang Yang, Wen‐Chi Pan

PeerJ, 2024

1 citation

Abstract

Background Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are prescribed to treat gastric acid-related diseases, while they may also have potential risks to population health. Recent studies suggested that a potential mechanism explaining the association between PPIs and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) includes the inhibition of the nitrate-nitrite-nitric oxide (NO) pathway. However, previous observational studies showed controversial results of the association. In addition, the inhibition of the NO pathway due to PPIs use may lead to peripheral vascular diseases (PVD); however, none of the studies explore the PPI-PVD association. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the association of PPIs with circulatory diseases (CVD, ischemic strokes or IS, and PVD). Methods We conducted a retrospective hospital-based cohort study from Oct 2010 to Sep 2017 in Songkhla province, Thailand. PPIs and histamine 2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) prescriptions were collected from electronic pharmacy records, while diagnostic outcomes were retrieved from electronic medical records at Songklanagarind hospital. Patients were followed up with an on-treatment approach. Cox proportional hazard models were applied to measure the association comparing PPIs vs H2RAs after 1:1 propensity-score-matching. Sub-group analysis, multi-bias E-values, and array-based sensitivity analysis for some covariates were used to assess the robustness of associations. Results A total of 3,928 new PPIs and 3,928 H2RAs users were included in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

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