Pantoprazole in Patients at Risk for Gastrointestinal Bleeding in the ICU
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Prophylaxis for gastrointestinal stress ulceration is frequently given to patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), but its risks and benefits are unclear. METHODS: In this European, multicenter, parallel-group, blinded trial, we randomly assigned adults who had been admitted to the ICU for an acute condition (i.e., an unplanned admission) and who were at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding to receive 40 mg of intravenous pantoprazole (a proton-pump inhibitor) or placebo daily during the ICU stay. The primary outcome was death by 90 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 3298 patients were enrolled; 1645 were randomly assigned to the pantoprazole group and 1653 to the placebo group. Data on the primary outcome were available for 3282 patients (99.5%). At 90 days, 510 patients (31.1%) in the pantoprazole group and 499 (30.4%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.13; P=0.76). During the ICU stay, at least one clinically important event (a composite of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, or myocardial ischemia) had occurred in 21.9% of patients assigned to pantoprazole and 22.6% of those assigned to placebo (relative risk, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.11). In the pantoprazole group, 2.5% of patients had clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, as compared with 4.2% in the placebo group. The number of patients with infections or serious adverse reactions and the percentage of days alive without life support within 90 days were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among adult patients in the ICU who were at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, mortality at 90 days and the number of clinically important events were similar in those assigned to pantoprazole and those assigned to placebo. (Funded by Innovation Fund Denmark and others; SUP-ICU ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02467621 .).
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The most recent and largest RCT did not demonstrate any effect of pantoprazole versus placebo on 90-day mortality or a composite outcome of clinically important events.
“However, it was noted that the most recent (and largest) RCT did not demonstrate any effect of pantoprazole versus placebo on 90-day mortality and a composite outcome of clinically important events [494].”
From Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [494]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 24 · Cited by 344
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Vincent JL, Moreno R, Takala J, et al. The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dys- function/failure. Intensive Care Med 1996; 22: 707-10.
- Authors
- Krag, M., Marker, S., Perner, A., Wetterslev, J., Wise, M. P., Schefold, J. C., Keus, F., Guttormsen, A. B., Bendel, S., Borthwick, M., Lange, T., Rasmussen, B. S., Siegemund, M., Bundgaard, H., Elkmann, T., Jensen, J. V., Nielsen, R. D., Liboriussen, L., Bestle, M. H., Elkjær, J. M., Palmqvist, D. F., Bäcklund, M., Laake, J. H., Bådstøløkken, P. M., Grönlund, J., Breum, O., Walli, A., Winding, R., Iversen, S., Jarnvig, I.-L., White, J. O., Brand, B., Madsen, M. B., Quist, L., Thornberg, K. J., Møller, A., Wiis, J., Granholm, A., Anthon, C. T., Meyhoff, T. S., Hjortrup, P. B., Aagaard, S. R., Andreasen, J. B., Sørensen, C. A., Haure, P., Hauge, J., Hollinger, A., Scheuzger, J., Tuchscherer, D., Vuilliomenet, T., Takala, J., Jakob, S. M., Vang, M. L., Pælestik, K. B., Andersen, K. L. D., van der Horst, I. C. C., Dieperink, W., Fjølner, J., Kjer, C. K. W., Sølling, C., Sølling, C. G., Karttunen, J., Morgan, M. P. G., Sjøbø, B., Engstrøm, J., Agerholm-Larsen, B., & Møller, M. H.
- Affiliations
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- University Hospital of Wales (GB)
- University of Bern (CH)
- University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
- Haukeland University Hospital (NO)
- Frederiksberg Hospital (DK)
- Oslo University Hospital (NO)
- Akershus University Hospital (NO)
- Aalborg University Hospital (DK)
- From the Department of Intensive Care (M.K., S.M., A.P., I.-L.J., J.O.W., B.B., M.B.M., L.Q., K.J.T., A.M., J. Wiis, A.G., C.T.A., T.S.M, P.B.H., M.H.M.), Copenhagen Trial Unit, Center for Clinical Intervention Research (J. Wetterslev, J.E.), and the Department of Neurointensive Care (R.D.N, C.S.), Rigshospitalet, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital (D.F.P.), and the Section of Biostatistics (T.L.), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Center for Research in Intensive Care (M.K., S.M., A.P., J....
- ORCID
- Krag, Mette
- Marker, Søren
- Perner, Anders
- Wetterslev, Jørn
- Wise, Matt P.
- Schefold, Joerg C.
- Keus, Frederik
- Guttormsen, Anne B.
- Bendel, Stepani
- Borthwick, Mark
- Lange, Theis
- Rasmussen, Bodil S.
- Siegemund, Martin
- Bestle, Morten H.
- Laake, Jon H.
- Bådstøløkken, Per M.
- Walli, Akil
- Madsen, Martin B.
- Møller, Anders
- Granholm, Anders
- Anthon, Carl T.
- Meyhoff, Tine S.
- Hjortrup, Peter B.
- Andreasen, Jo B.
- Hollinger, Alexa
- Scheuzger, Jonas
- Jakob, Stephan M.
- Pælestik, Kim B.
- Dieperink, Willem
- Fjølner, Jesper
- Kjer, Cilia K.W.
- Sølling, Christine
- Sølling, Christoffer G.
- Morgan, Matt P.G.
- Møller, Morten H.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2018-12-06
- Volume
- 379
- Issue
- 23
- Pages
- 2199-2208
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2898389841
- Cited by
- 344
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 32 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 38.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) (submittedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Innovation Fund Denmark (4108-00011A)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Nosocomial Infections in ICU
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
- Keywords
- pantoprazole, proton pump inhibitors, gastrointestinal bleeding, stress ulcer prophylaxis, intensive care unit patients, mortality, Clostridium difficile infection, pneumonia, myocardial ischemia, adverse drug reactions
- MeSH terms
- Pantoprazole, Aged, Female, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage, Humans, Injections, Intravenous, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Peptic Ulcer, Risk Factors, Stress, Physiological, Survival Analysis, Single-Blind Method, Critical Illness, Proton Pump Inhibitors
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review