Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis—Friend or Foe?*
In this issue of Critical Care Medicine, Alhazzani et al (8) report the results of the Reevaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) trial, an international, multicenter, randomized, blinded pilot trial of SUP with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) versus placebo. The overall aim was to assess if withholding SUP in adult critically ill patients was feasible and safe. Ninety-one patients from eight ICUs in three countries were randomized to 40 mg of IV pantoprazole or placebo once daily. Inclusion criteria were adult patients admitted to the ICU and anticipated to receive invasive mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours. Exclusion criteria included invasive mechanical ventilation for greater than 72 hours prior to randomization, use of PPIs due to active bleeding or increased risk of bleeding, use of dual antiplatelet therapy prior to randomization, palliative care or decision to withdraw advanced life support, previous enrollment in the REVISE trial or a related trial, pregnancy, trial participation declined by ICU treating physician, patient, or substitute decision maker, and receipt of two or more “daily dose equivalents” of prophylaxis with histamine-2-receptor antagonist or PPI during current ICU admission. The primary outcomes were feasibility outcomes, including consent rate, recruitment rate, and adherence to the protocol. Secondary outcomes were clinical outcomes: clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), Clostridium difficile infection, ICU and hospital mortality, and ICU and hospital length of stay. All a priori feasibility outcomes were achieved. Overall, 150 patients or substitute decision makers were asked for consent. In 59 cases, consent was unobtainable and 16 patients were not randomized for other reasons. The mean consent rate was 77.8%, the mean recruitment rate was 2.6 patients per center per month, and adherence to the protocol was 97.7%. No differences in the secondary clinical outcomes between the groups were reported: 6.1% versus 4.8% were diagnosed with clinically important gastrointestinal bleedings, 20.4% versus 14.3% with VAP, and 4.1% versus 2.4% with C. difficile infection in the PPI and placebo group, respectively.
The REVISE trial is a well-designed and conducted randomized multicenter feasibility trial. The methodology used is sound with resulting low risk of bias, and relevant feasibility outcomes were assessed. The trial and protocol proved feasible with no indication of harm by withholding SUP.