4.5 Article

Proton-pump inhibitors and risk of fractures: an update meta-analysis

Journal

OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL
Volume 27, Issue 1, Pages 339-347

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-015-3365-x

Keywords

Fracture; Meta-analysis; Proton-pump inhibitors; Risk

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A Summary To identify the relationship between proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and the risk of fracture, we conducted an update meta-analysis of observational studies. Results showed that PPI use was associated with a modestly increased risk of hip, spine, and any-site fracture. Introduction Many studies have investigated the association of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) with fracture risk, but the results have been inconsistent. To evaluate this question, we performed a meta-analysis of relevant observational studies. Methods A systematic literature search up to February 2015 was performed in PubMed. We combined relative risks (RRs) for fractures using random-effects models and conducted subgroup and stratified analyses. Results Eighteen studies involving a total of 244,109 fracture cases were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that PPI use could moderately increase the risk of hip fracture [RR = 1.26, 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) 1.16-1.36]. There was statistically significant heterogeneity among studies (p < 0.001; I-2 = 71.9 %). After limiting to cohort studies, there was also a moderate increase in hip fracture risk without evidence of study heterogeneity. Pooling revealed that short-term use (<1 year) and longer use (>1 year) were similarly associated with increased risk of hip fracture. Furthermore, a moderately increased risk of spine (RR = 1.58, 95 % CI 1.38-1.82) and any-site fracture (RR = 1.33, 95 % CI 1.15-1.54) was also found among PPI users. Conclusion In this update meta-analysis of observational studies, PPI use modestly increased the risk of hip, spine, and any-site fracture, but no evidence of duration effect in subgroup analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available