Evidence Hub

Proton pump inhibitors therapy and risk of Clostridium difficile infection: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Trifan A, Stanciu C, Girleanu I, Stoica OC, Singeap AM, Maxim R, Chiriac SA, Ciobica A et al.

World journal of gastroenterology, 2017

356,683 participants · 197 citations

Abstract

Aim: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) therapy and the risk of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). METHODS We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE/PubMed and seven other databases through January 1990 to March 2017 for published studies that evaluated the association between PPIs and CDI. Adult case-control and cohort studies providing information on the association between PPI therapy and the development of CDI were included. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random effect. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 test and Cochran's Q statistic. Potential publication bias was evaluated via funnel plot, and quality of studies by the Newcastle-Otawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS).

Results: Fifty-six studies (40 case-control and 16 cohort) involving 356683 patients met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Both the overall pooled estimates and subgroup analyses showed increased risk for CDI despite substantial statistical heterogeneity among studies. Meta-analysis of all studies combined showed a significant association between PPI users and the risk of CDI (pooled OR = 1.99, CI: 1.73-2.30, P P P P P 0.0001); unicenter (OR = 2.18, CI: 1.72-2.75, P 0.0001) and multicenter (OR = 1.82, CI: 1.51-2.19, P P 0.0001) and P 0.01). No significant differences were found in subgroup analyses (test for heterogeneity): P = 0.93 for case-control vs cohort, P = 0.85 for adjusted…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, 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: 356,683 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