Gastroenterology Research and Practice

Gastroenterology Research and Practice / 2020 / Article

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2020 |Article ID 9824615 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/9824615

Yashuo Wang, Wei Wang, Bin Wang, Yunyang Wang, "The Risk of Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage in Low-Dose Aspirin Users with Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis", Gastroenterology Research and Practice, vol. 2020, Article ID 9824615, 6 pages, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/9824615

The Risk of Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage in Low-Dose Aspirin Users with Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Academic Editor: Rami Eliakim
Received23 May 2020
Revised15 Jul 2020
Accepted23 Jul 2020
Published03 Aug 2020

Abstract

Background. Our aim was to assess the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage associated with diabetes among patients taking low-dose aspirin (≤325 mg/day). Methods. A systematic search was conducted for publication in English and Chinese using term equivalents for “GI hemorrhage”, “aspirin”, and “diabetes mellitus” up till April 2020. Electronic databases include PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and VIP Database. Two independent authors searched databases and reviewed abstracts for comprehensive studies keeping adequate study quality. Data of weighted odds ratios were statistically evaluated and potential bias was checked. Results. Among 446 publications, eight case-control researches, including 1601 patients, were deemed for this meta-analysis. Patients with diabetes were associated with a higher risk of GI hemorrhage than patients without diabetes: the summary ORs were 3.10 (95% CI, 2.35–4.09). The heterogeneity of the reports was not significant (, ; ). Conclusion. The meta-analysis showed that aspirin users with diabetes were more likely to have GI hemorrhage. Hence, when treating diabetics with aspirin, the increased risk of GI bleeding should be taken in consideration.

1. Introduction

As one of the most widely used agents among the world, aspirin is commonly used for treatment to migraine, pain, fever, or colds, and also for the prevention of cardio- and neurovascular diseases [1, 2]. The American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF), and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommend the use of aspirin in all patients with coronary artery disease [35]. The definition of “low-dose aspirin” is based on the North American formulation of single analgesic-strength tablets [6]. Most clinicians recommend a 100 mg tablet or less as the maximum daily dosage for treatment.

Nonetheless, long-term therapy with aspirin is reported to carry a risk of gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects, including ulceration and bleeding [79]. Derry’s research of a meta-analysis suggests that GI hemorrhage occurred in 2.47% of patients with long-term use of aspirin compared with 1.42% taking placebo (odds ratio 1.68; 95% CI, 1.51-1.88). And no evidence indicates that reducing the dose or using modified release formulations would reduce the risk of GI hemorrhage [10]. Aspirin might cause GI bleeding via inhibition of platelet aggregation and systemic effects on epithelial and endothelial cells of mucosa, therefore results in a lower rate of cell proliferation and migration [11].

Whether diabetes mellitus (DM) is an independent risk factor for GI bleeding among aspirin users is conflicting. A cohort study revealed that DM was an independent risk factor for upper GI bleeding among aspirin users [12]. However, another cohort research based on 186 425 individuals suggested that the use of aspirin was associated with a greater risk of major bleeding in most of the subgroups investigated but not in individuals with DM (IRR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.97-1.22) [13]. Therefore, in this study, we conducted an updated systematic review with the aim of identifying articles suitable for meta-analysis which reported GI hemorrhage in aspirin users with or without DM.

2. Methods

This article was conducted by the guidance of the PRISMA statement.

2.1. Search Strategy

Publications in English were searched in PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library database, and reports in Chinese were searched in Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang database, and VIP database up to April 2020. We searched the term equivalents for “GI hemorrhage”, “aspirin”, and “diabetes mellitus”. Detailed search strategies could be found in the Supplementary Material (available here). Two authors performed searching separately. Relevant articles were identified through the combination of electronic searching and manual checking of references from related publications.

2.2. Selection Criteria

Publications used in this meta-analysis were original case-control studies, which reported GI hemorrhage happening among aspirin users who have DM or not. Endoscopic documentation of GI bleeding was preferred but not essential. The inclusion criteria were the following: (1) case-control studies; (2) patients taking low-dose aspirin (≤325 mg/day); (3) outcomes including GI hemorrhage and/or peptic ulcer. According to the exclusion criteria, nonhuman researches, pharmacological experiments, single case reports, meta-analysis, reviews, guidelines, studies using concomitant drugs, and articles without full papers were foreclosed.

2.3. Appraisal of Study Quality and Data Extraction

The quality of studies included in this meta-analysis was assessed by two authors independently with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) [14]. Discrepancies in individual scores were discussed, and the mean score was calculated as the final one. Studies scoring seven or more were deemed as high quality.

Data were collected on baseline patient characteristics, aspirin dosage and duration, ratio of gender, and case numbers. All outcome data were extracted by two investigators (YS and YY).

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Meta-analysis summary statistics and heterogeneity were generated in the Fixed Effect model by the Mantel-Haenszel method with Review Manager 5.3. We calculated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for GI bleeding. Heterogeneity was estimated as Chi2 and I2.

3. Results

3.1. Publications and Study Characteristics

In total, 343 English records and 104 Chinese records were initially retrieved. After excluding 89 duplicates, 357 articles were screened according to the inclusion criteria. One hundred nonclinical studies were excluded (e.g., single case reports, meta-analysis, reviews, guidelines or pharmacological experiments, nonhuman researches). Then, those not meeting our treatments and outcomes were foreclosed. Nine papers were checked and reviewed in detail, and one of them was excluded due to its heterogeneity. In summary, eight case-control studies, which fulfilled our inclusion criteria were identified for our meta-analysis. The flowchart of the selection process is provided in Figure 1.

The eight publications in this meta-analysis included 1601 patients in total. 1176 took low-dose aspirin while the dosages of the other 425 were not reported. Two of the eight studies did not mention whether endoscopically confirmation was performed, but the context made it highly possible. And the other six publications suggested endoscopic evidence of GI hemorrhage. The characteristics of these studies are listed in Table 1.


StudyAgesGender: male : femaleAspirin dosage (mg/day)Aspirin durationCases: inclusion criteriaNOS score

Dai et al. 2014 [15]64 : 401003 months–15 yearsUpper GI hemorrhage5
Guo and Zhang 2017 [16]80 :  561003 months–14 yearsGI hemorrhage7
Kawamura et al. 2013 [17]NRNR75≥3 monthsUlcer as a mucosal deficit >5 mm in diameter8
Li et al. 2015 [18]118 : 102100≥3 months;
mean months:
Gastrorrhagia and/or duodenal hemorrhage7
Luo 2016 [19]120 : 56NR≥2 monthsUpper GI hemorrhage5
Negovan et al. 2016 [20]NRNR75-325≥1 monthsGastroduodenal ulcer and/or hemorrhage6
Quan 2015 [21]113 : 87NR≥2 monthsUpper GI hemorrhage8
Zhang et al. 2016 [22]210 : 130≤100≥7 daysGI hemorrhage5

NR: not report; GI: gastrointestinal.
3.2. Quality Assessment

All of the eight papers reached five points by NOS, and four of the eight researches were high quality (scored as seven or more). The main reasons for studies rating lower than seven were the absence of community-based controls. The NOS scores were listed in Table 1.

3.3. Meta-Analysis

Raw data were extracted from these eight papers to generate ORs for GI hemorrhage in patients taking aspirin with or without DM (Figure 2). The summary OR was 3.10 (95% CI, 2.35-4.09). The pooled effected size in the meta-analysis indicated that GI hemorrhage was higher in aspirin users with DM than those without. In Figures 2 and 3, the heterogeneity of the reports was not significant (, ; ).

3.4. Sensitivity Analysis

We recalculated the pooled effected size for the analysis in which only high-quality studies were included. The summary OR was 3.05 with a 95% CI of 2.02–4.62 (Figure 4). The result was similar to which all studies were pooled.

4. Discussion

This meta-analysis suggests that DM is a risk factor for GI hemorrhage among patients who take low-dose aspirin. The OR values of all these eight studies included were more than two, and the summary OR was 3.1 (95% CI, 2.35–4.09). Sensitivity analysis of research quality yielded similar estimates of the increased frequency of GI bleeding associated with DM (OR, 3.05; 95% CI, 2.02–4.62). Our study offered a numerical value for consideration of aspirin treatment in patients with DM.

DM is considered to be associated with a hypercoagulable state [23]; however, a cohort study showed that DM increased GI bleeding risk even without taking aspirin [13]. So DM and aspirin might be two individual risk factors contributing to GI bleeding. DM may also enhance the mechanism by which aspirin causes GI bleeding. Aspirin induces prostaglandin depletion, damaging the gastric epithelial cell barrier [24]. The repairment of the cell barrier needs sufficient microcirculation, which may be interrupted in DM patients.

The total number of aspirin users is projected to rise, which poses substantial attention on the potential side effects such as GI bleeding. When treating patients with DM, the risk of GI bleeding should be taken in consideration. It is reasonable to suggest that patients receiving aspirin should be strongly considered for test-and-treat approach. Furthermore, an alternative medicine for aspirin may seem straightforward.

5. Conclusion

Despite the limitations, the consistency of our results (after sensitivity analysis) indicates that in patients taking low-dose aspirin, the likelihood of GI hemorrhage in individuals with DM is higher than those without DM. And further studies should help to elucidate whether the benefit of aspirin outweighs the risk in appropriate patients groups.

6. Strengths and Limitations

This research confirmed that DM is a risk factor for GI bleeding among aspirin users. The main strength is that it is the first meta-analysis focusing on case-control studies to investigate the contribution of DM to rates of GI hemorrhage in patients taking low-dose aspirin. Previous researches answered this question by performing random controlled trials. Limitations of our research lies in the quality of studies included. Because our data were derived from case-control studies, the comparability of groups can hardly be assured and unrecognized confounders could have influenced outcomes.

Data Availability

The data in this meta-analysis are from previously reported studies and datasets, which have been cited. The processed data are available in Table 1 of our manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

Yashuo Wang (YS) and Wei Wang (W) independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and performed the statistical analysis. YS and Yunyang Wang (YY) cowrote the manuscript and interpreted the statistical results. YY and Bin Wang (B) checked this work again and critically revised the paper. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Supplementary Materials

Summary of literature search strategies. (Supplementary Materials)

References

  1. J. M. Guirguis-Blake, C. V. Evans, C. A. Senger, E. A. O'Connor, and E. P. Whitlock, “Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events: a systematic evidence review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force,” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 164, no. 12, pp. 804–813, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. J. A. Bittl, U. Baber, S. M. Bradley, and D. N. Wijeysundera, “Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Systematic Review for the 2016 ACC/AHA Guideline Focused Update on Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 68, no. 10, pp. 1116–1139, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. G. Montalescot, U. Sechtem, S. Achenbach et al., “2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: The Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology,” European Heart Journal, vol. 34, no. 38, pp. 2949–3003, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. S. C. Smith, E. J. Benjamin, R. O. Bonow et al., “AHA/ACCF secondary prevention and risk reduction therapy for patients with coronary and other atherosclerotic vascular disease: 2011 Update,” Circulation, vol. 124, no. 22, pp. 2458–2473, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. S. D. Fihn, J. M. Gardin, J. Abrams et al., “2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons,” Circulation, vol. 126, no. 25, pp. e354–e471, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. C. Patrono, “Aspirin: new cardiovascular uses for an old drug,” The American journal of medicine, vol. 110, SUPPLEMENT 1, no. 1, pp. S62–S65, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. L. Elvira, M. González, P. Patrignani, S. Tacconelli, and L. A. García Rodríguez, “Variability among nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding,” Arthritis Rheum, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 1592–1601, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. A. S. Taha, W. J. Angerson, R. P. Knill-Jones, and O. Blatchford, “Upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage associated with low-dose aspirin and anti-thrombotic drugs - a 6-year analysis and comparison with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs,” Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 285–289, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. A. S. Taha, W. J. Angerson, R. Prasad, C. Mccloskey, and O. Blatchford, “Upper gastrointestinal bleeding and the changing use of COX-2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and low-dose aspirin,” Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1171–1178, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. S. Derry and Y. K. Loke, “Risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage with long term use of aspirin: meta-analysis,” BMJ, vol. 321, no. 7270, pp. 1183–1187, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. C. Patrono, “Aspirin as an antiplatelet drug,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 330, no. 18, pp. 1287–1294, 1994. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. P. J. Luo, X. H. Lin, C. C. Lin et al., “Risk factors for upper gastrointestinal bleeding among aspirin users: an old issue with new findings from a population-based cohort study,” Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, vol. 118, no. 5, pp. 939–944, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. G. De Berardis, G. Lucisano, A. D’Ettorre et al., “Association of aspirin use with major bleeding in patients with and without diabetes,” JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 307, no. 21, pp. 2286–2294, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. G. A. Wells, B. Shea, D. O'Connell et al., The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Non-Randomized Studies in Meta-Analysis, 2000.
  15. Y. X. Dai, X. Q. Qi, J. Y. Li et al., “Analysis of risk factors of upper gastrointestinal bleeding caused by oral aspirin,” Journal of Clinical Research, vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 2343–2346, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  16. H. Guo and J. Zhang, “Analysis of risk factors of upper bleeding caused by aspirin among old people,” Laboratory Medicine and Clinic, vol. 14, pp. 227–229, 2017. View at: Google Scholar
  17. N. Kawamura, Y. Ito, M. Sasaki et al., “Low-dose aspirin-associated upper gastric and duodenal ulcers in Japanese patients with no previous history of peptic ulcers,” BMC Research Notes, vol. 6, no. 1, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. P. Li, W. L. Li, Y. Che et al., “Clinical analysis of 120 cases of esophagogastric varices caused by small doses of oral aspirin,” Journal of Hunan Normal University(Medical Science), vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 35–37, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  19. W. Luo, “Risk factors for oral administration of aspirin in upper hemorrhage,” World Latest Medicine Information (Electronic Version), vol. 16, no. 28, pp. 90-91, 2016. View at: Google Scholar
  20. A. Negovan, M. Iancu, V. Moldovan et al., “Clinical risk factors for gastroduodenal ulcer in Romanian low-dose aspirin consumers,” Gastroenterology Research and Practice, vol. 2016, Article ID 7230626, 8 pages, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. L. P. Quan, “Risk factors for oral administration of aspirin in upper digestive tract hemorrhage Gansu,” Medical Journal, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 886–888, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  22. R. Zhang, T. Liu, and X. L. Wu, “Risk factors of aspirin-users with coronary artery diseases in upper bleeding,” Journal of Clinical Medicine Research, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 1998–2000, 2016. View at: Google Scholar
  23. M. E. Carr, “Diabetes mellitus: a hypercoagulable state,” Journal of Diabetes and its Complications, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 44–54, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. W. Tomisato, S. Tsutsumi, T. Hoshino et al., “Role of direct cytotoxic effects of NSAIDs in the induction of gastric lesions,” Biochemical Pharmacology, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 575–585, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2020 Yashuo Wang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder
Views1550
Downloads325
Citations

Related articles

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.