Histamine-2 Receptor Antagonists and Proton Pump Inhibitors Are Associated With Reduced Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Without Comorbidities Including Diabetes, Hypertension, and Dyslipidemia: A Propensity Score-Matched Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to identify the effect of histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use on the positivity rate and clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We performed a nationwide cohort study with propensity score matching using medical claims data and general health examination results from the Korean National Health Insurance Service. Individuals aged ≥ 20 years who were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between 1 January and 4 June 2020 were included. Patients who were prescribed H2RA or PPI within 1 year of the test date were defined as H2RA and PPI users, respectively. The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 test positivity, and the secondary outcome was the instance of severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19, including death, intensive care unit admission, and mechanical ventilation administration. RESULTS: Among 59,094 patients tested for SARS-CoV-2, 21,711 were H2RA users, 12,426 were PPI users, and 24,957 were non-users. After propensity score matching, risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly lower in H2RA users (odds ratio [OR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.98) and PPI users (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52-0.74) compared to non-users. In patients with comorbidities including diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, the effect of H2RA and PPI against SARS-CoV-2 infection was not significant, whereas the protective effect was maintained in patients without such comorbidities. Risk of severe clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients showed no difference between users and non-users after propensity score matching either in H2RA users (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.52-1.54) or PPI users (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.60-2.51). CONCLUSION: H2RA and PPI use is associated with a decreased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection but does not affect clinical outcome. Comorbidities including diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia seem to offset the protective effect of H2RA and PPI.

Helicobacter pylori eradication rates using clarithromycin and levofloxacin-based regimens in patients with previous COVID-19 treatment: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is affecting half of the globe. It is considered a main causative organism of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer disease, and different gastric maliganacies. It has been also correlated to extraintestinal diseases, including refractory iron deficiency anaemia, vitamin B12 deficiency, and immune thrombocytopenic purpura. The misuse of antibiotics during the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic time can affect H. pylori eradication rates. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of clarithromycin versus levofloxacin-based regimens for H. pylori treatment in naïve patients after the COVID-19 pandemic misuse of antibiotics. METHODS: A total of 270 naïve H. pylori infected patients with previous treatment for COVID-19 more than 3 months before enrolment were recruited. Patients were randomized to receive either clarithromycin, esomeprazole, and amoxicillin, or levofloxacin, esomeprazole, and amoxicillin. RESULTS: A total of 270 naïve H. pylori infected patients with previous treatment for COVID-19 more than 3 months before enrolment were included, 135 in each arm. In total, 19 patients in the clarithromycin group and 18 patients in the levofloxacin group stopped treatment after 2-4 days because of side effects or were lost for follow-up. Finally, 116 subjects in the clarithromycin group and 117 in the levofloxacin group were assessed. The eradication rates in intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) analyses were: group I, 55.56% and 64.66%; and Group II, 64.44% and 74.36% respectively (p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: As COVID-19 pandemic has moved forward fast, high resistance rates of H. pylori to both clarithromycin and levofloxacin were developed after less than two years from the start of the pandemic. Molecular & genetic testing is highly recommended to identify antimicrobial resistance patterns. Strategies to prevent antibiotic misuse in the treatment of COVID-19 are needed to prevent more antibiotic resistance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05035186. Date of registration is 2-09-2021.

Risk factors of active upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with COVID-19 infection and the effectiveness of PPI prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is one of the most impactful complications in patients hospitalized from COVID-19 infection. Limited study has focused on patients with upper GI bleeding (UGIB). This study aimed to identify the risk factors of patients who were hospitalized from COVID-19 infection and developed UGIB as well as the effectiveness of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) prophylaxis in those patients. METHODS: This study was comprised of two phases. The first phase was the retrospective enrollment of patients who were admitted due to COVID-19 infection and developed UGIB between April and August 2021 to evaluate the associated factors of active UGIB. The second phase was a retrospective analysis after PPI prophylaxis protocol from September - October 2021 to assess the benefit of PPI use in those patients. RESULTS: Of 6,373 patients hospitalized, 43 patients (0.7%) had evidence of UGIB. The majority were male 28 (65.1%) with a mean age of 69.1 ± 11.8 years. Twenty-four of 43 patients (55.8%) needed mechanical ventilation, 35 patients (81.4%) received systemic corticosteroids, and 10 patients (23.3%) were taking anticoagulants for venous thromboembolic prophylaxis. Seven of 43 patients (16%) had active UGIB. There was no significant difference in the number of patients taking antiplatelets, anticoagulants, or steroids and the severity of COVID-19 infection between the two groups. An emergency endoscopy or endoscopic hemostasis were performed in 6/7 (85.7%) patients. The multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed two significant factors associated with active UGIB including higher of Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) per point (OR = 7.89; 95%CI 1.03-72.87; p = 0.04) and an absence of PPI use (OR 4.29; 95%CI 1.04-19.51; p = 0.04). After prescribing PPI as a prophylaxis, there was a slightly lower incidence of UGIB (0.6% vs 0.7%) in addition to an absence of active UGIB (0% vs 16%). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the absence of PPI and higher GBS were significant risk factors for active UGIB which required therapeutic endoscopy in patients with COVID-19 infection. We suggest that short-term PPI prophylaxis should be prescribed in those patients once they need hospitalization regardless of the severity of COVID-19 infection to minimize the severity of UGIB.

Effect of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy vs laparoscopic sleeve + Rossetti fundoplication on weight loss and de novo GERD in patients affected by morbid obesity: a randomized clinical study.

PURPOSE: To compare sleeve gastrectomy (SG) to SG associated with Rossetti fundoplication (SG + RF) in terms of de novo gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) after surgery, weight loss, and postoperative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients affected by morbid obesity, without symptoms of GERD, who were never in therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), were randomized into two groups. One group underwent SG and the other SG + RF. The study was stopped on February 2020 due to the COVID pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 278 patients of the programmed number of 404 patients were enrolled (68.8%). De novo esophagitis was considered in those patients who had both pre- and postoperative gastroscopy (97/278, 34.9%). Two hundred fifty-one patients (90.3%) had completed clinical follow-up at 12 months. SG + RF resulted in an adequate weight loss, similar to classic SG at 12-month follow-up (%TWL = 35. 4 ± 7.2%) with a significantly better outcome in terms of GERD development. One year after surgery, PPIs were necessary in 4.3% SG + RF patients compared to 17.1% SG patients (p = 0.001). Esophagitis was present in 2.0% of SG + RF patients versus 23.4% SG patients (p = 0.002). The main complication after SG + RF was wrap perforation (4.3%), which improved with the surgeon's learning curve. CONCLUSION: SG + RF seemed to be an effective alternative to classic SG in preventing de novo GERD. More studies are needed to establish that an adequate learning curve decreases the higher percentage of short-term complications in the SG + RF group.

Comparative risk of incidence and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 among proton pump inhibitor and histamine-2 receptor antagonist short-term users: a nationwide retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate incidence risk and adverse clinical outcomes in COVID-19 disease among short-term users of acid-suppressants in South Korea. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study, conducted using a nationwide claims database for South Korea, used data from patients with COVID-19 tested between January 1 and May 15, 2020. Patients aged over 18 years and prescribed proton pump inhibitors (PPI) or histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) for more than 7 days were identified. Primary outcome was COVID-19 while secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, hospitalization with respiratory disease, or intensive respiratory intervention. Large-scale propensity scores were used to match patients, while the Cox proportional hazard model was utilized to evaluate any association between exposure and outcome(s). The risk estimates were calibrated by using 123 negative control outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 26,166 PPI users and 62,117 H2RA users. After propensity score matching, compared to H2RA use, PPI use was not significantly associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (calibrated hazard ratio [HR], 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.30-2.19]); moreover, PPI use was not associated with adverse clinical outcomes in COVID-19, namely, hospitalization with respiratory disease (calibrated HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.72-1.08]), intensive respiratory interventions (calibrated HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.46-1.82]), except for all-cause mortality (calibrated HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.31-0.95]). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that the PPI user was not associated with risk of COVID-19 compared to H2RA users. There was no significant relationship between severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19 and exposure to PPI compared with H2RA, except for all-cause mortality.

Case Report: Systemic Sclerosis After Covid-19 Infection.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a respiratory tract infection caused by the new virus SARS-CoV-2. The acute phase of the infection may in certain individuals be followed by another longer phase of disease (long COVID) of unknown etiology probably associated in certain cases with autoimmune activation. It has been shown that COVID-19 can trigger autoantibody production and in genetically predisposed patients may cause the onset or exacerbation of autoimmune diseases. We are reporting a case of mild COVID-19 infection complicated by autoantibody production and cutaneous and gastrointestinal symptoms and subsequently diagnosed with systemic sclerosis (SSc). A 47-year-old man with no history of any autoimmune diseases and in good health became sick together with his family on the 12th of November with mild symptoms: tiredness, fever, cough, and sore throat. Oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 tested positive. He was isolated at home and did not require hospitalization. Three weeks later he presented with clinical manifestation compatible with suspicion of SSc. He briefly presented with skin rush, periorbital edema and conjunctivitis, vomiting, dysphagia, burning sensation in the skin, above all in the fingertips and around the mouth, puffy fingers, Raynaud's phenomenon, pain at the fingertip of the middle finger where a depressed area was noticed without a clear ulceration. ANA showed a strongly positive nucleolar pattern. Anti-PM/Scl 75 and PM/Scl 100 resulted positive. High-resolution computed tomography (HCRT) showed early stage of interstitial lung disease (ILD). The patient was diagnosed with SSc based on the persistence of autoantibodies and the clinical and radiological pictures according to the ACR/EULAR classification (scores: puffy finger, 2; ILD, 2; Raynaud's phenomenon, 3; SSc related antibodies, 3; total 10). There are several cases described in the medical literature of possible new onset of SLE after COVID-19 infection. This is the first case that describes a possible new onset of SSc. Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 may trigger systemic sclerosis.

Drug therapies for reducing gastric acidity in people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Malabsorption of fat and protein contributes to poor nutritional status in people with cystic fibrosis. Impaired pancreatic function may also result in increased gastric acidity, leading in turn to heartburn, peptic ulcers and the impairment of oral pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. The administration of gastric acid-reducing agents has been used as an adjunct to pancreatic enzyme therapy to improve absorption of fat and gastro-intestinal symptoms in people with cystic fibrosis. It is important to establish the evidence regarding potential benefits of drugs that reduce gastric acidity in people with cystic fibrosis. This is an update of a previously published review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of drug therapies for reducing gastric acidity for: nutritional status; symptoms associated with increased gastric acidity; fat absorption; lung function; quality of life and survival; and to determine if any adverse effects are associated with their use. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic and non-electronic database searches, handsearches of relevant journals,  abstract books and conference proceedings. Both authors double checked the reference lists of the searches Most recent search of the Group's Trials Register: 26 April 2021. On the 26 April 2021 further searches were conducted on the clinicaltrials.gov register to identify any ongoing trials that may be of relevance. The WHO ICTRP database was last searched in 2020 and is not currently available for searching due to the Covid-19 pandemic. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and quasi-randomised trials involving agents that reduce gastric acidity compared to placebo or a comparator treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: The searches identified 40 trials; 17 of these, with 273 participants, were suitable for inclusion, but the number of trials assessing each of the different agents was small. Seven trials were limited to children and four trials enrolled only adults. Meta-analysis was not performed, 14 trials were of a cross-over design and we did not have the appropriate information to conduct comprehensive meta-analyses. All the trials were run in single centres and duration ranged from five days to six months. The included trials were generally not reported adequately enough to allow judgements on risk of bias. However, one trial found that drug therapies that reduce gastric acidity improved gastro-intestinal symptoms such as abdominal pain; seven trials reported significant improvement in measures of fat malabsorption; and two trials reported no significant improvement in nutritional status. Only one trial reported measures of respiratory function and one trial reported an adverse effect with prostaglandin E2 analogue misoprostol. No trials have been identified assessing the effectiveness of these agents in improving quality of life, the complications of increased gastric acidity, or survival. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Trials have shown limited evidence that agents that reduce gastric acidity are associated with improvement in gastro-intestinal symptoms and fat absorption. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to indicate whether there is an improvement in nutritional status, lung function, quality of life, or survival. Furthermore, due to the unclear risks of bias in the included trials, we are unable to make firm conclusions based on the evidence reported therein. We therefore recommend that large, multicentre, randomised controlled clinical trials are undertaken to evaluate these interventions.

Might proton pump or sodium-hydrogen exchanger inhibitors be of value to ameliorate SARs-CoV-2 pathophysiology?

Discovering therapeutics for COVID-19 is a priority. Besides high-throughput screening of compounds, candidates might be identified based on their known mechanisms of action and current understanding of the SARs-CoV-2 life cycle. Using this approach, proton pump (PPIs) and sodium-hydrogen exchanger inhibitors (NHEIs) emerged, because of their potential to inhibit the release of extracellular vesicles (EVs; exosomes and/or microvesicles) that could promote disease progression, and to directly disrupt SARs-CoV-2 pathogenesis. If EVs exacerbate SARs-CoV-2 infection as suggested for other viruses, then inhibiting EV release by PPIs/NHEIs should be beneficial. Mechanisms underlying inhibition of EV release by these drugs remain uncertain, but may involve perturbing endosomal pH especially of multivesicular bodies where intraluminal vesicles (nascent exosomes) are formed. Additionally, PPIs might inhibit the endosomal sorting complex for transport machinery involved in EV biogenesis. Through perturbing endocytic vesicle pH, PPIs/NHEIs could also impede cleavage of SARs-CoV-2 spike protein by cathepsins necessary for viral fusion with the endosomal membrane. Although pulmonary epithelial cells may rely mainly on plasma membrane serine protease TMPRSS2 for cell entry, PPIs/NHEIs might be efficacious in ACE2-expressing cells where viral endocytosis is the major or a contributing entry pathway. These pharmaceutics might also perturb pH in the endoplasmic reticulum-Golgi intermediate and Golgi compartments, thereby potentially disrupting viral assembly and glycosylation of spike protein/ACE2, respectively. A caveat, however, is that facilitation not inhibition of avian infectious bronchitis CoV pathogenesis was reported in one study after increasing Golgi pH. Envelope protein-derived viroporins contributed to pulmonary edema formation in mice infected with SARs-CoV. If similar pathogenesis occurs with SARs-CoV-2, then blocking these channels with NHEIs could ameliorate disease pathogenesis. To ascertain their potential efficacy, PPIs/NHEIs need evaluation in cell and animal models at various phases of SARs-CoV-2 infection. If they prove to be therapeutic, the greatest benefit might be realized with the administration before the onset of severe cytokine release syndrome.

Is it possible to use Proton Pump Inhibitors in COVID-19 treatment and prophylaxis?

Coronaviruses (CoV), discovered after 1960, caused human life-threatening outbreaks. SARS-CoV2, which appeared in Wuhan, China in December 2019, causing Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome and has different features than other coronaviruses, has been determined and the disease caused by the virus has been called "Coronavirus Disease-2019" (COVID-19). This disease activates both the natural and acquired immune system. The cytokin storm, in which blood levels of proinflammatory cytokines are detected excessively high is developing and the uncontrolled inflammatory response causes local and systemic tissue damages. Although a spesific drug has not been found yet, the medications currently in use for other indications, whose pharmacokinetic- pharmacodynamic properties and toxic doses are already known; are included in the treatment practice of COVID-19. These drugs affect the entry of the virus into the cell and its intracellular distribution. They also have anti-inflammatory and immunomodulating effects too. Therefore, we think that Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI's) with similar mechanisms of action may also be involved in COVID-19 treatment and prophylaxis.

PPIs and Beyond: A Framework for Managing Anticoagulation-Related Gastrointestinal Bleeding in the Era of COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) can be associated with high morbidity and mortality; patients with severe clinical manifestations may develop significant coagulopathy as well as unexpected thromboembolic complications. In response, centers are increasingly treating selected patients with intermediate-dose prophylactic or even therapeutic dose anticoagulation in order to prevent potentially catastrophic thrombotic complications. With this changing practice, the authors suspect that inpatient gastrointestinal consult teams across the country will be frequently managing COVID-19 patients with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). In order to reduce potentially avoidable hospital readmissions for GIB while improving patient outcomes, it is imperative to appropriately risk-stratify patients prior to initiation of anticoagulation. In this review, we discuss how to appropriately identify high-risk patients for GIB and how to mitigate GIB risk with proton-pump inhibitor co-therapy, medication reconciliation, and Helicobacter pylori testing and treating in this complex and morbid population.

Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients with Severe SARS-CoV-2.

Gastrointestinal symptoms are common and frequently reported in Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). It is unclear if SARS-CoV-2 is associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Nevertheless, GIB in COVID-19 patients poses unique challenges to patients due to high-risk of concomitant respiratory failure and to endoscopy personnel due to risk of airborne transmission during endoscopic procedures. Many management issues related to COVID-19 are still being studied. In this case series, we attempt to discuss the important clinical implications related to the management of GIB in COVID-19 patients.