4.7 Review

Systematic review: the effects of long-term proton pump inhibitor use on serum gastrin levels and gastric histology

期刊

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
卷 42, 期 6, 页码 649-663

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apt.13324

关键词

-

资金

  1. AstraZeneca R&D, Molndal, Sweden

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundProton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have a well-established safety profile. However, concerns have been raised about a potential relationship between PPI-induced hypergastrinaemia and the development of enterochromaffin-like (ECL) cell hyperplasia, neuroendocrine tumours and gastric cancer during long-term therapy. AimTo review the effects of long-term PPI use on serum gastrin levels and gastric histopathology. MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed on 21 April 2015 to identify studies reporting the effects of long-term (defined as >3years) PPI use on gastrin levels and gastric histopathology. ResultsA total of 16 studies (1920 patients) met the inclusion criteria. During long-term PPI therapy, mean gastrin levels rose to one to three times the upper limit of the normal range (similar to 100pg/mL), and an increased prevalence of ECL cell hyperplasia was observed (+7.8-52.0%). Helicobacter pylori-positive patients had a significantly increased risk of developing ECL linear/micronodular hyperplasia compared with H. pylori-negative patients [OR: 2.45 (95% CI: 1.47-4.10), P=0.0006]; however, no evidence of neoplastic changes was found. The risk of corpus atrophy was markedly higher in H. pylori-positive patients than in H. pylori-negative patients [OR: 11.45 (95% CI: 6.25-20.99), P<0.00001]. Not a single case of gastric adenocarcinoma was found. ConclusionsLong-term PPI therapy induced moderate hypergastrinaemia in most patients and an increased prevalence of ECL cell hyperplasia. H. pylori-positive patients receiving long-term PPI therapy were exposed to a higher risk of corpus atrophy than H. pylori-negative patients. No neuroendocrine tumours or gastric cancers were found.

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