Editorial

DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-E-24-00070

Gastrointestinal protection with proton pump inhibitors in cardiovascular patients: still misunderstood and underutilised

Deepak L. Bhatt1, MD, MPH, FESC, MBA

Despite randomised clinical trial data, there has been long-standing controversy and debate about whether proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) raise ischaemic risk in the context of dual antiplatelet therapy. Some observational studies have suggested an association between PPI use and higher rates of ischaemic events, but these studies were all confounded by the fact that sicker patients were the ones being prescribed the PPIs. An insightful analysis from the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System showed the potential misclassification of angina as gastro-oesophageal reflux, with PPI use essentially serving as a proxy for undetected and untreated coronary artery disease in some cases1. The prior observational studies were, in part, undertaken because of the suggestion in platelet function studies of an interaction between clopidogrel and PPIs, in particular older PPIs such as omeprazole. However, these pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions have not consistently been shown to predict cardiovascular outcomes2. In fact, the randomised COGENT trial in acute coronary syndrome and stented patients demonstrated no increase in ischaemic events during the critical 6 months after presentation in patients receiving both clopidogrel and omeprazole but,...

Sign in to read
the full article

Forgot your password?
No account yet?
Sign up for free!

Create my pcr account

Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from PCRonline.com

Volume 21 Number 4
Feb 17, 2025
Volume 21 Number 4
View full issue


Key metrics

Suggested by Cory

10.4244/EIJV15I12A192 Dec 20, 2019
GLOBAL LEADERS: looking now at the bigger picture
Guedeney P and Montalescot G
free

Editorial

10.4244/EIJ-E-24-00027 May 20, 2024
Can DAPT be discontinued at one month after PCI in high bleeding risk patients presenting with ACS?
Hong M and Lee Y
free

Debate

10.4244/EIJ-E-24-00009 Jun 17, 2024
Antiplatelet monotherapy after DAPT: is clopidogrel the new standard? Pros and cons
Kim H et al
free

10.4244/EIJV11I13A281 Apr 20, 2016
DAPT: a historical accident in the pharmacological treatment of post-percutaneous coronary intervention
Suwannasom P and Serruys PW
free

Reply to the letter to the editor

10.4244/EIJ-D-24-00594 Aug 19, 2024
Reply: Identifying vulnerable coronary atherosclerotic plaques: from theory to practice
Val D et al
free

Perspective

10.4244/EIJ-E-23-00001 Apr 3, 2023
Aspirin should be stopped at day 0 after PCI: pros and cons
Gurbel P et al
free
Trending articles
317.8

State-of-the-Art Review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00695 Nov 19, 2021
Transcatheter treatment for tricuspid valve disease
Praz F et al
free
108.3

Viewpoint

10.4244/EIJ-E-22-00007 May 15, 2022
TAVI at 20: how a crazy idea led to a clinical revolution
Eltchaninoff H et al
free
96.8

State-of-the-Art

10.4244/EIJ-D-24-00066 Apr 21, 2025
Management of complications after valvular interventions
Bansal A et al
free
91.6

Image – Interventional flashlight

10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00344 Aug 5, 2022
First dedicated transcatheter leaflet splitting device: the ShortCut device
Tchétché D et al
free
68.05

State-of-the-Art

10.4244/EIJ-D-24-00992 Sep 15, 2025
Antithrombotic therapy in complex percutaneous coronary intervention
Castiello D et al
free
X

PCR
Impact factor: 9.5
2024 Journal Citation Reports®
Science Edition (Clarivate Analytics, 2025)
Online ISSN 1969-6213 - Print ISSN 1774-024X
© 2005-2025 Europa Group - All rights reserved