Intermittent Versus Continuous Infusion Dosing of Intravenous Proton Pump Inhibitors for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Abstract

Background:

Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) continuous infusions or intermittent boluses are used for the treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Intermittent boluses are easier to give and are of lower cost without affecting clinical outcomes.

Objective:

To compare the rate of rebleeding between intermittent bolus and continuous infusion PPI therapy.

Methods:

We performed a retrospective, multicenter review of patients with UGIB receiving either continuous or intermittent PPI therapy. During the study period, due to drug and supply shortages, each institution implemented policies preferring intermittent PPI bolus therapy. We performed bivariate and multivariable comparisons of the 2 treatment strategies, with the primary outcome of interest being incidence of rebleeding. Additional variables of interest included intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital lengths of stay, discharge disposition, and in-hospital mortality.

Results:

Compared with intermittent bolus dosing (n = 209), patients receiving continuous infusion PPI (n = 237) were associated with a higher rate of rebleeding (33.8% vs 23.0%; P = 0.012); however, no difference was detected in multivariable analysis: adjusted odds ratio, 1.50 (95% confidence interval, 0.91-2.50). There was no difference in median hospital or ICU length of stay, discharge disposition, or in-hospital mortality. Correlatively, patients receiving continuous infusion therapy were more likely to have liver disease (29.1% vs 20.1%; P = 0.028), alcohol use disorder (28.3% vs 16.3.%; P = 0.003), history of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (6.4% vs 1.9%; P = 0.021), variceal bleeding (6.3 vs 2.4%, P = 0.045), and be admitted to the ICU (65.0% vs 32.5%, P = 0.00).

Conclusions:

Introduction of intermittent PPI bolus UGIB treatment via change in hospital policy was not associated with higher rates of rebleeding. However, continuous PPI therapy may have been perceived as more effective as it was used more commonly in high-risk patients.