4.7 Review

Proton Pump Inhibitors and Bone Health: An Update Narrative Review

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms231810733

关键词

bisphosphonates; bone mineral mensity; fall; fracture risk; osteoporosis; proton pump inhibitor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly used antacid drugs that decrease acid secretion in the stomach. Recent studies have suggested that long-term use of PPIs may be associated with an increased risk of osteoporotic fractures, particularly in young patients. Further research is needed to understand the underlying mechanisms of this bone fragility.
Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are an antacid drug often used in acid-related disorders. They decrease acid secretion in the stomach by blocking an enzyme called H+/K+ ATPase which controls acid production. Introduced to the market in 1989, their use has increased rapidly worldwide and they are now among the top 10 most prescribed drugs in the United States. As of 2015, the FDA has already approved six drugs of this class (omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, dexlansoprazole, pantoprazole and rabeprazole). Recently, the risks and benefits of long-term PPI use were questioned and many studies indicated that their use should be carefully considered, especially in young patients, whose treatment with these drugs could last many years. Even greater concerns have been raised about a potential positive association between PPIs and osteoporotic fracture risk including the hip, spine and wrist. Although based on observational studies, there is substantial evidence associating the long-term use of PPIs and fracture. This relationship is only partially admitted due to the lack of consistent effects of PPIs on bone mineral density loss. Therefore, this narrative review aimed to discuss the recent findings pertaining to the risk of osteoporotic fracture associated with PPIs, in particular prolonged use, and to call for further research to elucidate the mechanisms associated with this bone fragility.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据