A149 CHARACTERIZING INAPPROPRIATE PROTON-PUMP INHIBITOR DISCONTINUATION IN PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL STRICTURES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Recent recommendations to reduce proton pump inhibitor (PPI) usage may cause uncertainty for clinicians and patients. We have shown increased PPI discontinuation rates in patients with esophageal strictures in recent years. Purpose: We aim to determine the appropriateness of PPI discontinuation in patients undergoing esophageal dilation for symptomatic strictures. Purpose We aim to determine the appropriateness of PPI discontinuation in patients undergoing esophageal dilation for symptomatic strictures. Method All patients from two gastroenterology practices who received dilations to treat symptomatic esophageal strictures in 2015-2021, (group 1: 2015-17 and group 2: 2019-21) were identified using physician billing codes for this retrospective study. Patient demographics, medications, and previous GI diagnoses were collected using endoscopy reports, nursing reports and medication records from the local hospital database. We defined PPI discontinuation as either a 50% dose reduction, 50% frequency reduction or complete medication discontinuation at the time of endoscopic dilation compared to the established PPI therapy. Next, we defined inappropriate PPI discontinuation as a patient who discontinued their PPI medication with a past history of 1. esophageal stricture, 2. Barrett’s esophagus 3. grade C/D esophagitis, or 4. experienced symptom reoccurrence after PPI discontinuation. We selected these criteria as they are consistent with both Canadian and American Gastroenterology Society GERD management guidelines. This information was coded on a standard data sheet and entered into SPSS for analysis. Result(s) In total, 223 patients were identified with an average age of 58.7 and a sex ratio of (125:98, M:F). 26 patients discontinued their PPI medication prior to esophageal stricture dilation. The most frequent type of event was complete PPI discontinuation at 58% (15/26 cases). Followed by frequency reduction at 27% (7/26), dose reduction at 8% (2/26), and both dose and frequency reduction at 8% (2/26). The 26 patients with PPI discontinuations had an average length of 13 months between PPI discontinuation and esophageal stricture dilation. 57% (15/26 cases) of patients meet our criteria for inappropriate PPI discontinuation (table 2). The proportion of inappropriate PPI discontinuation are as follows: Group 1: 33% (3/9 cases) inappropriate PPI discontinuations and Group 2: 70% (12/17 cases) inappropriate PPI discontinuations, (P=0.06) upon Chi-squared analysis. Table 2- Inappropriate PPI discontinuations Previous Stricture: 10/26 Barrett’s Esophagus: 0/26 Grade C/D Esophagitis: 1/26 Symptom Reoccurrence: 4/26 Total inappropriate discontinuations: 15/26 = 57% Total appropriate discontinuations (no PMH): 11/26 = 43% Conclusion(s) Compete PPI discontinuation was the most common type of PPI discontinuation event. There was a trend toward more inappropriate PPI discontinuations in the second time period. Physicians should carefully consider indications for PPI use prior to discontinuation. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below None Disclosure of Interest K. Kecskemeti: None Declared, M. Borgaonkar Consultant of: $10K, Speakers bureau of: $20K, J. McGrath: None Declared
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".