4.3 Article

Correlation between proton pump inhibitors and risk of pyogenic liver abscess

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 73, Issue 8, Pages 1019-1025

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-017-2256-9

Keywords

Proton pump inhibitors; Pyogenic liver abscess; Case-control study; Taiwan

Funding

  1. Taiwan Ministry of Health and Welfare Clinical Trial Center [MOHW106-TDU-B-212-113004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Little is known about the relationship between proton pump inhibitors use and pyogenic liver abscess. The objective of this study was to evaluate the correlation between proton pump inhibitors use and pyogenic liver abscess in Taiwan. This was a population-based case-control study using the database of the Taiwan National Health Insurance Program since 2000 to 2011. Subjects aged 20 to 84 who experienced their first episode of pyogenic liver abscess were enrolled as the case group (n = 1372). Randomly selected subjects aged 20 to 84 without pyogenic liver abscess were enrolled as the control group (n = 1372). Current use, early use, and late use of proton pump inhibitors was defined as subjects whose last one tablet for proton pump inhibitors was noted <= 30 days, between 31 to 90 days and >= 91 days before the date of admission for pyogenic liver abscess. Subjects who never received a prescription for proton pump inhibitors were defined as nonusers of proton pump inhibitors. A multivariable unconditional logistic regression model was used to measure the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval to evaluate the correlation between proton pump inhibitors use and pyogenic liver abscess. After adjusting for confounders, the adjusted odds ratio of pyogenic liver abscess was 7.59 for subjects with current use of proton pump inhibitors (95% confidence interval 5.05, 11.4), when compared with nonusers. Current use of proton pump inhibitors is associated with a greater risk of pyogenic liver abscess.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available