Management of NSAID-related gastrointestinal mucosal injury

The three therapeutic goals in patients with NSAID-induced gastroduodenopathy are treatment of dyspeptic symptoms, management of NSAID-related ulcers and their complications, and prophylaxis against recurrent gastrointestinal toxicity. Both H₂-receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) appear to be helpful in relieving the symptoms associated with NSAID use, while treatment of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal ulcers, whether the NSAID is continued or not, is best achieved by the use of PPIs. However, because symptoms do not often predict the presence of gastroduodenal ulcers, the goal of prevention has become paramount in the treatment of patients with an increased likelihood of gastrointestinal toxicity. The best prophylaxis against NSAID-related toxicity is the use of an alternative agent such as salsalate or paracetamol (acetaminophen). However, if an NSAID is to be used, prophylaxis is best accomplished with a PPI or misoprostol, a prostaglandin E1 analogue. The use of misoprostol is limited by its frequent dosing, at least 200 μg three times a day, and its own gastrointestinal side effects. Future therapy will include NSAIDs that maintain their antiinflammatory effects, while possessing superior safety profiles, and include preferential and highly selective COX-2 inhibitors and nitric oxide releasing compounds.     

Diclofenac/misoprostol. Pharmacoeconomic implications of therapy.

The combined formulation of diclofenac/misoprostol provides effective relief of pain and inflammation, with a 2- to 3-fold lower incidence of NSAID-associated gastroduodenal ulcers than diclofenac monotherapy. Both components of the combined formulation have been widely used and have well documented efficacy and tolerability profiles. Compared with other agents used as prophylaxis for NSAID-induced gastropathies, misoprostol is generally considered to have the most extensive outcomes data establishing its efficacy in preventing both gastric and duodenal ulcers associated with long term NSAID use. Economic analyses conducted to date have shown that diclofenac/misoprostol is associated with similar or lower total direct medical treatment costs compared with other NSAIDs (with or without coprescribed misoprostol or an alternate prophylactic agent). As with pharmacoeconomic studies of coprescribed misoprostol with NSAIDs, the most favourable results with the combined formulation of diclofenac/misoprostol appear to be in patients at high risk of developing NSAID-associated gastroduodenal ulcers (e.g. the elderly). Although economic analyses with diclofenac/misoprostol were conducted in several different countries using a variety of methodologies and employing a wide range of clinical and economic assumptions, results have been generally favourable for the combined formulation. However, as is the case with pharmacoeconomic analyses in general, results of individual studies with diclofenac/misoprostol may not be generalisable between countries and are subject to change over time. Overall, clinical and economic data suggest that the optimal and most cost-effective use of the combined formulation of diclofenac/misoprostol is in patients requiring long term NSAID therapy who are at increased risk of developing NSAID-induced gastropathy, such as elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis.     

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: add an anti-ulcer drug for patients at high risk only. Always limit the dose and duration of treatment with NSAIDs

In addition to their cardiac, renal, hepatic, cutaneous and neuropsychological adverse effects, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can have severe effects on the entire gastrointestinal tract, including bleeding, perforation and occlusion. Which anti-ulcer drugs reduce the risk of the severe gastrointestinal adverse effects of NSAIDs, and which patients should receive them? To answer these questions, we conducted a review of the literature, using the standard Prescrire methodology. The main risk factors for severe gastrointestinal adverse effects during NSAID therapy are: a high dose regimen; age over 65 years; a history of gastric or duodenal ulcer or gastrointestinal bleeding; heavy use of both alcohol and tobacco; and concomitant treatment with a corticosteroid, antiplatelet drug, anticoagulant, or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant. Gastrointestinal symptoms and ulceration (on endoscopy) are poor predictors of severe gastrointestinal reactions. A meta-analysis examined randomised placebo-controlled trials of misoprostol in more than 11 000 patients. The results were mainly based on a large trial including about 9000 rheumatoid arthritis patients with an average age of 68 years. Misoprostol (400 microg to 800 microg/day, in 4 doses) prevented about 4 severe gastroduodenal events when 1000 patients over 60 years of age were treated for 6 months. Diarrhoea and other mild gastrointestinal disorders were frequent. There are no randomised trials comparing proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine H2 receptor antagonists versus misoprostol or versus placebo therapy for the prevention of severe adverse effects associated with NSAIDs. PPIs and H2 antagonists both reduce the incidence of gastric or duodenal ulceration detected by routine endoscopy. A randomised trial compared an H2 antagonist (famotidine) versus a PPI (pantoprazole) in 128 patients with an average age of 69 years who had a very high risk of serious gastrointestinal adverse effects while taking low-dose aspirin. After 48 weeks of treatment, pantoprazole was more effective than famotidine for the prevention of overt gastrointestinal bleeding. The symptomatic effects of PPIs and H2 antagonists may create a false sense of security, leading some patients to increase their NSAID use and resulting in a paradoxical increase in severe gastrointestinal effects. In practice, anti-ulcer drugs are not sufficiently effective to warrant their use by NSAID-treated adults who are not at high risk of severe gastrointestinal events. Misoprostol has proven efficacy in patients with risk factors for NSAID-induced severe gastroduodenal adverse effects, especially patients over 65 years of age, but it also has frequent adverse effects and necessitates 4 daily doses. Omeprazole is an alternative when the adverse effects or dosing frequency of misoprostol are unacceptable, provided patients are warned not to increase their NSAID consumption.     

Review article: controversies in NSAID-induced gastroduodenal damage-do they matter?

Background. This article reviews various issues surrounding NSAID-induced gastroduodenal ulceration, about which there appear to be conflicting views and data in the literature. These issues include the size, clinical relevance and main site of the problem; when complications occur (early or late?); the relevance of non-ulcer lesions and whether adaptation is a clinically relevant phenomenon. Method. A comprehensive literature search was carried out to identify relevant new data published since 1987. Results. NSAIDs are causally associated with more gastric than duodenal ulcers but their use may be associated with duodenal ulcers or complications. Erosive lesions may progress to more severe damage. The theories of early or late onset of complications during a course of NSAID therapy may not be mutually exclusive. Conclusions. Available data indicate that NSAID ulcers are at least as dangerous as classic peptic ulcers, and result in significant morbidity and mortality which in the patient population does not appear to be significantly reduced by processes such as adaptation.     

COX-2 inhibitors vs. NSAIDs in gastrointestinal damage and prevention

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) inhibit production of protective gastric mucosal prostaglandins and also have a direct topical irritant effect. In some patients this results in dyspepsia and development of gastroduodenal erosions and ulceration. The risk of ulcer complications, such as bleeding, perforation and death is increased approximately 4-fold in NSAID users. Patients at high risk of ulcer complications include the elderly, those taking anticoagulants, steroids and aspirin, those with a previous history of peptic ulceration and patients with concomitant serious medical problems. The interaction of NSAIDs with Helicobacter pylori (the major cause of peptic ulceration in non-NSAID users) is controversial and some studies suggest that H. pylori infection may even protect against NSAID-induced ulceration. Selective inhibitors of the inducible cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) enzyme spare COX-1 in the gastric mucosa and, hence, do not inhibit production of mucosal prostaglandins. COX-2-selective inhibitors are associated with a significant reduction in gastroduodenal damage compared with traditional NSAIDs. Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are probably the best agents for healing and prevention of NSAID-induced ulcers. Preliminary studies suggest that COX-2 selective inhibitors, like traditional NSAIDs, may prevent lower gastrointestinal cancer. Further studies are needed but they may be useful in individuals at high risk of certain types of lower gastrointestinal malignancy with increased gastrointestinal tolerability and safety.     

Novel therapeutic approaches to gastric and duodenal ulcers: an update

Over the last 25 years, a remarkable revolution in the pathophysiology and treatment of gastric and duodenal ulcers has occurred. Effective therapies were developed not only to heal ulcers, but also to cure most patients. The two principal causes for gastric and duodenal ulcers are either infection with Helicobacter pylori or the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). With H. pylori eradication, gastric and duodenal ulcers are rapidly becoming historical diseases. This communication reviews the salient pharmacology of the novel anti-ulcer drugs currently in development, with particular emphasis on the treatment of gastric and duodenal ulcers. Intense research is currently focused on the development of proton pump inhibitors primarily for the treatment and prevention of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The older proton pump inhibitors, omeprazole and lansoprazole, are effective in healing gastric and duodenal ulcers. Furthermore, both drugs are effective in eradicating H. pylori when given with various antibiotics. Pantoprazole, rabeprazole and esomeprazole are new proton pump inhibitors, which appear to have comparable therapeutic profiles with omeprazole and lansoprazole. Rebamipide is a new mucosal protective drug, which is effective in healing gastric ulcers. Polaprezinc and nocloprost are also mucosal protective drugs, which are in clinical development. However, none of these three cytoprotective drugs have been evaluated for their efficacy in eradicating H. pylori when given in combination with antibiotics. Likewise, no published literature exists on the use of these drugs for preventing NSAID-induced ulcers. With the rapid eradication of H. pylori currently happening in the developed world, the therapeutic challenge is now directed toward preventing NSAID-associated ulcer. Significant reduction of NSAID-induced ulcers is achieved by using continuous prophylactic anti-ulcer therapy (misoprostol or omeprazole) or by using NSAIDs possessing selective COX-2 inhibitory activity. However, outcome clinical studies are needed to compare the adjuvant anti-ulcer therapies given with COX-1 inhibitors versus the selective COX-2 inhibitors given alone.     

Novel therapeutic approaches to gastric and duodenal ulcers: an update

Over the last 25 years, a remarkable revolution in the pathophysiology and treatment of gastric and duodenal ulcers has occurred. Effective therapies were developed not only to heal ulcers, but also to cure most patients. The two principal causes for gastric and duodenal ulcers are either infection with Helicobacter pylori or the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). With H. pylori eradication, gastric and duodenal ulcers are rapidly becoming historical diseases. This communication reviews the salient pharmacology of the novel anti-ulcer drugs currently in development, with particular emphasis on the treatment of gastric and duodenal ulcers. Intense research is currently focused on the development of proton pump inhibitors primarily for the treatment and prevention of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The older proton pump inhibitors, omeprazole and lansoprazole, are effective in healing gastric and duodenal ulcers. Furthermore, both drugs are effective in eradicating H. pylori when given with various antibiotics. Pantoprazole, rabeprazole and esomeprazole are new proton pump inhibitors, which appear to have comparable therapeutic profiles with omeprazole and lansoprazole. Rebamipide is a new mucosal protective drug, which is effective in healing gastric ulcers. Polaprezinc and nocloprost are also mucosal protective drugs, which are in clinical development. However, none of these three cytoprotective drugs have been evaluated for their efficacy in eradicating H. pylori when given in combination with antibiotics. Likewise, no published literature exists on the use of these drugs for preventing NSAID-induced ulcers. With the rapid eradication of H. pylori currently happening in the developed world, the therapeutic challenge is now directed toward preventing NSAID-associated ulcer. Significant reduction of NSAID-induced ulcers is achieved by using continuous prophylactic anti-ulcer therapy (misoprostol or omeprazole) or by using NSAIDs possessing selective COX-2 inhibitory activity. However, outcome clinical studies are needed to compare the adjuvant anti-ulcer therapies given with COX-1 inhibitors versus the selective COX-2 inhibitors given alone.     

Esomeprazole: a review of its use in the management of gastric acid-related diseases in adults

Esomeprazole (Nexium); S-omeprazole) is a single optical isomer proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) approved for the management of reflux oesophagitis, the symptomatic treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD), the prevention and healing of NSAID-associated gastric ulcer disease (and the prevention of NSAID-associated duodenal ulcers in the UK), the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection and associated duodenal ulcer disease (and prevention of relapse of H. pylori-associated peptic ulcers in the UK), and the treatment of Zollinger-Ellison syndrome (and other hypersecretory syndromes in the US).Once-daily oral esomeprazole 40 mg demonstrates greater antisecretory activity than other PPIs. Overall, in well designed clinical studies of 4 weeks' to 6 months' duration in patients with GORD, esomeprazole had similar or better efficacy than other agents. In patients requiring ongoing treatment with NSAIDs, co-therapy with once-daily esomeprazole 20 or 40 mg achieved relief of gastrointestinal symptoms or prevented ulcer occurrence, more effectively than placebo. Esomeprazole was also better than ranitidine 150 mg twice daily in healing NSAID-associated gastric ulcers. In addition, the drug has demonstrated efficacy as part of a triple-therapy regimen for the eradication of H. pylori infection, the healing of H. pylori associated duodenal ulcers and the prevention of relapse of gastric ulcers. Esomeprazole also effectively treated patients with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. Esomeprazole is generally well tolerated with an adverse-event profile similar to that of other PPIs. Thus, the efficacy and tolerability of esomeprazole for the management of GORD and H. pylori eradication remains undisputed, and the data support its use for the first-line treatment of NSAID-associated gastric ulcer disease and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome.     

NSAID-associated adverse effects and acid control aids to prevent them: a review of current treatment options.

NSAIDs are central to the clinical management of a wide range of conditions. However, NSAIDs in combination with gastric acid, which has been shown to play a central role in upper gastrointestinal (GI) events, can damage the gastroduodenal mucosa and result in dyspeptic symptoms and peptic lesions such as ulceration.NSAID-associated GI mucosal injury is an important clinical problem. Gastroduodenal ulcers or ulcer complications occur in up to 25% of patients receiving NSAIDs. However, these toxicities are often not preceded by indicative symptoms. Data obtained from the Arthritis, Rheumatism, and Aging Medical Information System have shown that 50-60% of NSAID-associated peptic ulcer cases can remain clinically silent and do not present until complications occur. Therefore, prophylactic treatment to prevent GI complications may be necessary in a substantial proportion of NSAID users, especially those in groups associated with a high risk of developing these complications.Use of cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective NSAIDs, also known as 'coxibs', substantially reduces the incidence of upper GI toxicities seen with non-selective NSAIDs. However, there are concerns regarding the cardiovascular safety of coxibs. For this reason, the US FDA recommends minimal use of coxibs and only when strictly necessary. Additionally, rofecoxib has been removed from the US market and sales of valdecoxib have been suspended. Furthermore, upper GI toxicities still occur in patients receiving coxibs. Therefore, cotherapies are required to prevent and/or heal upper GI effects associated with NSAID use. Effective prophylactic and treatment strategies include misoprostol, histamine H(2) receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The key role that gastric acid plays in upper GI adverse events among NSAID users suggests that it is important to choose the most effective agent for acid control to alleviate symptoms, heal mucosal erosions and improve the reduced quality of life in this patient population. PPIs provide effective acid suppression, which is essential to avoid GI mucosal injury, and they are, therefore, capable of dramatically decreasing the morbidity and mortality associated with this disorder.Since many serious GI complications are not heralded by any previous symptoms, physicians need to be aware of risk factor profiles that predispose patients to serious GI problems. Physicians also need to initiate the appropriate preventative acid suppressive therapy to minimise the burden of NSAID-associated GI adverse effects.     

Gastroprotection and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS). Rationale and clinical implications.

There is no doubt that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) cause gastrointestinal injury. The most serious consequences are gastric and duodenal ulcers which can cause bleeding and perforation, and which may lead to the premature death of 3000 to 4000 patients in the UK annually. The immediate actions of NSAIDs operate at a subcellular level; in particular altering of mitochondrial function which causes depletion of ATP and renders the cell vulnerable to oxidant stress. Secondary consequences follow, such as the inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis which delays cellular repair. While adaptation can be shown in volunteers despite continued NSAID ingestion, studies in patients suggest mucosal damage develops continuously and cumulatively even with low doses of aspirin. Histamine H2-receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors heal NSAID-related ulcers, though healing rates with H2-antagonists are slower in patients who continue NSAID treatment. They have little role in preventing damage. In addition to acid suppression, prostaglandin analogues cause bicarbonate secretion and enhance mucosal blood flow. They have a specific role in both prevention and treatment of NSAID-related damage. The use of misoprostol offers a rational approach to reduce the high prevalence of unwanted gastroduodenal damage from NSAIDs. On a purely financial basis more information is needed before routine coprescribing can be recommended. However, for any patient on NSAIDs with a previous ulcer or for patients aged over 60 years (where the risks and seriousness of complications are markedly increased), the use of misoprostol should be considered. Further developments in prostaglandin analogues may reduce their adverse effects and perhaps thereby improve their efficacy at symptom control.     

Helicobacter pylori and NSAID gastropathy

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and Helicobacter pylori are known to share a number of pathogenic mechanisms, but there is no evidence to show a significant synergic action between the two risk factors. Studies assessing this subject have differed in almost every aspect of their methodology, including the definition of a NSAID user as well as the types, doses, duration and their indications for NSAID use. They also differed in their end-points, the definition of dyspepsia and the regimes used for eradication of H. pylori . However, some conclusions may be drawn from the results of clinical trials.
In H. pylori -positive patients without mucosal lesions, NSAIDs may aggravate dyspeptic symptoms but, with the exception of elderly patients, they do not present a definite major risk of gastric and duodenal lesions and, above all, of ulcer-correlated complications.
So what recommendations can be made with regard to H. pylori eradication in patients requiring treatment with NSAIDs? The microorganism and the anti-inflammatory drugs are undoubtely independent causes of gastric and duodenal damage. Patients taking NSAIDs who are found to have gastric or duodenal ulcers should therefore be tested for the bacterium and specifically treated, since H. pylori and NSAID-induced ulcers may be macroscopically indistinguishable.
Whether asymptomatic patients taking NSAIDs should be tested and treated for H. pylori infection is still a matter of debate.     

Review article: Helicobacter pylori and NSAID gastropathy

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and Helicobacter pylori are known to share a number of pathogenic mechanisms, but there is no evidence to show a significant synergic action between the two risk factors. Studies assessing this subject have differed in almost every aspect of their methodology, including the definition of a NSAID user as well as the types, doses, duration and their indications for NSAID use. They also differed in their end-points, the definition of dyspepsia and the regimes used for eradication of H. pylori. However, some conclusions may be drawn from the results of clinical trials. In H. pylori-positive patients without mucosal lesions, NSAIDs may aggravate dyspeptic symptoms but, with the exception of elderly patients, they do not present a definite major risk of gastric and duodenal lesions and, above all, of ulcer-correlated complications. So what recommendations can be made with regard to H. pylori eradication in patients requiring treatment with NSAIDs? The microorganism and the anti-inflammatory drugs are undoubtely independent causes of gastric and duodenal damage. Patients taking NSAIDs who are found to have gastric or duodenal ulcers should therefore be tested for the bacterium and specifically treated, since H. pylori and NSAID-induced ulcers may be macroscopically indistinguishable. Whether asymptomatic patients taking NSAIDs should be tested and treated for H. pylori infection is still a matter of debate.     

Helicobacter pylori infection is a protective factor for bleeding gastric ulcers but not for bleeding duodenal ulcers in NSAID users

BACKGROUND: The effect of Helicobacter pylori infection on NSAID-induced gastroduodenal damage is unclear. AIM: To determine the role of H. pylori and NSAID use in complicated peptic ulcers. METHODS: A total of 185 consecutive patients with bleeding peptic ulcers and 185 hospitalized matched controls were studied prospectively. Additionally, 75 consecutive uncomplicated peptic ulcers and 75 community controls were also studied. Active H. pylori infection was determined by urea breath test and/or both urease test and histology. Serum CagA and VacA status were determined at random in 135 infected patients and 82 controls. NSAID use was determined by structured data collection. RESULTS: H. pylori (odds ratio [OR]=5. 98; 2.9-12.3) and NSAID use (OR=5.74; 3.4-9.7) were independent risk factors for duodenal ulcer bleeding, whereas NSAID use was the main risk factor for bleeding gastric ulcers (OR=12.4; 5.5-27.9). Interaction of both factors was associated with reduced risk for bleeding gastric ulcers (OR=0.19; 0.04-0.88) but not for bleeding duodenal ulcers, which showed a similar risk to any one factor alone. This was observed for all types of NSAID use, including low-dose aspirin, and infection by CagA positive strains. H. pylori was the only factor involved in common uncomplicated duodenal ulcers. CONCLUSION: Interaction of both H. pylori infection and NSAID use decreases the risk of bleeding due to gastric ulcers, but not that due to duodenal ulcers.     

Review article: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated gastrointestinal complications—guidelines for prevention and treatment

Chronic ingestion of NSAIDs increases the risk for gastrointestinal complications, which range from dyspepsia to gastrointestinal bleeding, obstruction, and perforation. Among patients using NSAIDs, 0.1 to 2.0% per year suffer serious gastrointestinal complications. Patients who require analgesic therapy should be carefully assessed for the lowest possible dosage and shortest duration of NSAID use and for the potential of treatment with a non-NSAID pain reliever. These patients should also be assessed for factors that increase their risk of gastrointestinal complications, including increased age, concomitant anticoagulant or corticosteroid use, and past history of NSAID-associated gastrointestinal complications. The exact association between Helicobacter pylori infection and NSAID-related ulcer disease is unclear, and the routine testing and treatment of all NSAID using patients for H. pylori infection is not recommended at this time. NSAID-using patients who suffer from dyspepsia should have NSAIDs discontinued, the dosage changed, or be changed to a different class of NSAID. If NSAIDs cannot be discontinued, then an antisecretory agent should be initiated. Misoprostol prevents NSAID-associated gastrointestinal complications. Proton pump inhibitors are the most effective at healing NSAID-associated ulcers among patients who cannot discontinue NSAID therapy.     

An overview of the key role of misoprostol in the prophylaxis of NSAID-associated ulcers and their complications

In 22 controlled endoscopic studies misoprostol has consistently been shown to prevent NSAID-associated gastric and duodenal ulcers. The clinical relevance of such studies has now been proven by the MUCOSA study. This study in 8843 arthritic patients has shown that misoprostol significantly reduces serious NSAID-induced upper GI complications by about half, compared with placebo. No other therapeutic agent has been shown to reduce serious complications of NSAIDs. In the majority of endoscopic studies H₂-receptor blockers and omeprazole prevent duodenal but not gastric ulcers caused by NSAIDs. Since the serious GI complications caused by NSAIDs arise from the stomach and duodenum in equal proportions, and since we cannot predict the site of occurrence, it is essential that any prophylactic agent should prevent ulcers at both sites. Misoprostol is the only agent consistently shown to do this, and allied with data showing that it reduces GI complications it can play a key role in modifying the natural history of this iatrogenic disease.     

Analysis of the costs of NSAID-associated gastropathy. Experience in a US health maintenance organisation

Clinicians recognise nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as valuable first-line agents in the treatment of rheumatic disorders and as dangerous irritants to the gastrointestinal tract. This has led to questions about the economic impact of NSAID-induced gastropathy in populations. This study estimated the 1992 costs of NSAID-associated gastropathy episodes, and calculated an iatrogenic cost factor for NSAID-associated gastropathy among elderly members of a health maintenance organisation (HMO), the Northwest Region of Kaiser Permanente. Using data retrieved from automated databases and from medical records, NSAID and antiulcer drug costs were calculated, and estimates were made of the incidence rates of inpatient and outpatient NSAID-associated gastropathies, the services provided to treat them, and the cost of those services. Kaiser Permanente Northwest spent $US0.35 for each $US1.00 spent on NSAID therapy for the elderly, an iatrogenic cost factor of 1.35. The estimated average treatment per NSAID-associated gastropathy episode was $US2172. The average outpatient pharmacy cost per elderly NSAID user was $US80 and estimated average NSAID-associated treatment cost per elderly NSAID user was $US43. Although the findings were specific to the HMO because of the databases used, the methodology employed and the drug formulary influence on NSAID selection, they show that a substantial amount of resources were used to treat NSAID-induced gastropathies in the elderly, underscoring the risk of prescribing NSAIDs and reinforcing the need for their prudent use in elderly patients.     

Management of NSAID/aspirin-induced small intestinal damage by GI-sparing NSAIDs, anti-ulcer drugs and food constituents

Recent advances in endoscopic techniques such as capsule endoscopy have revealed that aspirin and other nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) often cause mucosal lesions not only in the upper gastrointestinal tract, but also in the small intestine in humans. Gastric and duodenal lesions caused by NSAIDs can be treated with anti-secretory agents such as proton pump inhibitors or histamine H2-receptor antagonists; however, these drugs are ineffective in treating NSAID-induced lesions in the small intestine. Furthermore, there are few effective agents for the treatment of small intestinal lesions. Therefore, identification of effective therapies for the treatment of NSAID/aspirin-induced small intestinal lesions remains an urgent priority. In the present review, we focus on novel pharmacological treatments to prevent or reduce NSAID-induced intestinal lesions, i.e., 1) GI-sparing NSAIDs (NO- or H2S-NSAIDs, NSAIDs mixed with phosphatidylcholine); 2) anti-ulcer drugs such as mucosal protective agents (misoprostol, rebamipide, teprenone, etc.) and anti-secretory agents (lansoprazole, etc.); 3) antibiotics (metronidazole) and probiotics (Lactobacillus sp.); and 4) food constituents (lactoferrin and soluble dietary fibers). We surveyed data from clinical trials evaluating these novel treatments. Also reviewed herein were the pros and cons of the novel protective methods from the standpoint of safety, efficacy, convenience, and cost.