You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 133 No. 3, March 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (14)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Bacterial Infections
 •Pneumonia
 •Infectious Diseases
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Effects of Sucralfate vs Antacids on Gastric Pathogens

Results of a Double-blind Clinical Trial

Kimberly S. Ephgrave, MD; Rachel Kleiman-Wexler, PharmD; Michael Pfaller, MD; Brenda M. Booth, PhD; David Reed, PhD; Lisa Werkmeister, RN; Sharon Young

Arch Surg. 1998;133:251-257.

Background  Unblinded studies suggested that sucralfate prophylaxis for stress ulcers is associated with a lower rate of nosocomial pneumonia than acid-reducing approaches. We performed a randomized, double-blind, double-sham clinical trial comparing the exact microbial effects of each treatment.

Methods  One hundred forty patients entered this study before major elective surgery, allowing baseline cultures of gastric and pulmonary secretions to be obtained intraoperatively. Postoperatively, the patients were treated with standard doses of either sucralfate or antacids, plus a sham of the other drug. Cultures were repeated twice daily for 3 days. Molecular epidemiological typing was used to track the appearance of specific microbes and their transmission from site to site, and clinical end points were compared. The number of patients chosen was for sufficient statistical power to detect differences in the microbial measures, as detecting differences in clinical measures would have required increasing the sample size by an order of magnitude.

Results  Gastric pH was affected by the form of stress ulcer prophylaxis throughout the study, and this pH effect affected the number of new gastric organisms appearing in the 2 different groups. Colonization of the airway with new gastric organisms occurred more frequently in the antacid than in the sucralfate group, and colonization of the airway with organisms of gastric origin was associated with occurrence of postoperative pneumonia.

Conclusions  Both sucralfate and antacids offered safe and effective stress ulcer prophylaxis in this double-blind clinical trial of postoperative patients in an intensive care unit. In association with the drug's effects on gastric pH, more new pathogens appeared in the gastric contents of antacid-treated than sucralfate-treated patients.


From the Surgical Service, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Iowa City, Iowa (Drs Ephgrave, Kleiman-Wexler, Pfaller, Booth, and Reed and Mss Werkmeister and Young); Colleges of Medicine (Drs Ephgrave and Pfaller), Pharmacy (Dr Kleiman-Wexler), and Nursing (Dr Reed), University of Iowa, Iowa City; and Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Little Rock, Ark (Dr Booth).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1998 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.