Management of Peptic Ulcer Disease in Patients Taking Antithrombotic Agents

Chang Seok Bang; Eun Jeong Gong

doi:10.7704/kjhugr.2026.0002

Korean J Helicobacter Up Gastrointest Res > Volume 26(2); 2026 > Article

Bang and Gong: Management of Peptic Ulcer Disease in Patients Taking Antithrombotic Agents

Review

The Korean Journal of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research 2026;26(2):116-124.

Published online: June 8, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7704/kjhugr.2026.0002

Management of Peptic Ulcer Disease in Patients Taking Antithrombotic Agents

Chang Seok Bang

, Eun Jeong Gong

Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea

Corresponding author Eun Jeong Gong, MD, PhD Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, 77 Sakju-ro, Chuncheon 24253, Korea E-mail: gej@hallym.ac.kr

Received January 2, 2026; Revised January 9, 2026; Accepted January 9, 2026;

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The management of peptic ulcer disease (PUD) in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy requires balancing bleeding and thrombotic risk. The shift from Helicobacter pylori-dominant to drug-induced PUD combined with increasing antithrombotic use has created a new high-risk population that demands particular attention. In this review, we synthesize the current evidence from Korean and international guidelines, focusing on practical management strategies for the acute treatment and long-term prevention of PUD. Key recommendations include individualized risk assessment of bleeding and thrombotic risks, timely resumption of antithrombotic agents following successful hemostasis, and mandatory proton pump inhibitor co-therapy for high-risk patients. Multidisciplinary collaboration and evidence-based approaches are necessary to optimize patient outcomes while minimizing gastrointestinal and cardiovascular complications.

Key words: Anticoagulants; Antiplatelet agents; Gastrointestinal hemorrhage; Peptic ulcer

INTRODUCTION

Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) is a mucosal defect that extends through the muscularis mucosa into the submucosa or deeper layers of the gastrointestinal (GI) wall, predominantly occurring in the stomach and duodenum [1]. The pathophysiology fundamentally reflects an imbalance between aggressive factors (e.g., gastric acid, pepsin, Helicobacter pylori, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs]) and mucosal defensive mechanisms (e.g., mucus-bicarbonate barrier, epithelial cell renewal, blood flow to mucosa, and prostaglandin synthesis) [2,3]. Historically, H. pylori infection has been the predominant etiology [4]. NSAIDs have emerged as a major etiologic factor, causing mucosal injury through both direct topical irritation and systemic inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis, thereby compromising mucosal defense mechanisms [5,6].

The management of PUD has entered a new era of complexity as the global population ages and the cardio-cerebrovascular disease burden expands, driving unprecedented increases in antithrombotic agent use [7]. This creates a clinical paradox: the use of medications that prevent life-threatening thrombotic events significantly increases the risk of GI complications. Gastroenterologists should now make intricate decisions regarding when to interrupt antithrombotic therapy, when to resume it after bleeding, and how to prevent recurrence, while coordinating with cardiology and neurology colleagues who bring different risk-benefit perspectives to these shared patients.

Antithrombotic agents encompass two principal pharmacological classes—antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants—each targeting distinct components of the hemostatic pathway [8]. Antiplatelet agents inhibit platelet activation and aggregation, thereby preventing arterial thrombosis, whereas anticoagulants interfere with the coagulation cascade to prevent fibrin clot formation, primarily addressing venous thromboembolism and cardioembolic events [9]. Antiplatelet agents are further subdivided based on their mechanism of action. Aspirin, the most widely used antiplatelet agent, irreversibly inhibits cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1), thereby preventing the synthesis of thromboxane A2, a potent mediator of platelet aggregation and vasoconstriction [10]. Because of the irreversible nature of COX-1 acetylation, the antiplatelet effect of aspirin persists for the lifespan of the platelet (approximately 7 to 10 days). P2Y12 receptor inhibitors constitute the second major class of antiplatelet agents, blocking the adenosine diphosphate-mediated pathway of platelet activation. This class includes thienopyridines (clopidogrel and prasugrel), which are prodrugs that require hepatic biotransformation to generate active metabolites that irreversibly bind to the P2Y12 receptor, and ticagrelor, a cyclopentyl-triazolo-pyrimidine that directly and reversibly inhibits the P2Y12 receptor without requiring metabolic activation [11]. The combination of aspirin with a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, termed dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), provides synergistic inhibition of platelet function and constitutes the standard of care following acute coronary syndrome.

Anticoagulants are classified into vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Warfarin, the prototypical VKA, inhibits vitamin K epoxide reductase, thereby impairing hepatic synthesis of vitamin K-dependent coagulation factors (II, VII, IX, and X) and anticoagulant proteins C and S [12]. The anticoagulant effect of warfarin requires several days to manifest fully, exhibits substantial inter-individual variability due to genetic polymorphisms and dietary vitamin K intake, and necessitates regular monitoring of the international normalized ratio (INR). DOACs are mechanistically subdivided into direct thrombin (factor IIa) inhibitor, dabigatran, and direct factor Xa inhibitors, including rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban [13]. These agents achieve rapid onset of anticoagulation within hours of administration and possess relatively short half-lives, although their elimination is significantly affected by renal function, particularly for dabigatran.

The landscape of PUD has shifted from the traditional H. pylori-dominant etiology toward drug-induced mucosal injury, with antithrombotic agents now implicated in a considerable proportion of PUD cases [14]. Simultaneously, the pharmacologic armamentarium has expanded dramatically, in that DOACs have largely replaced warfarin and the durations of DAPT have evolved [15-17]. In this review, we synthesize the current evidence and guidelines to provide a comprehensive framework for managing PUD in this high-risk population.

DIAGNOSIS

PUD is definitively diagnosed by endoscopic examination, which allows direct visualization, biopsy for histopathology and H. pylori testing, and therapeutic intervention for bleeding lesions [18]. The endoscopic diagnosis of PUD in patients on antithrombotic therapy follows standard protocols, with the Forrest classification system guiding the management of bleeding lesions [19]. However, pre-endoscopic evaluation requires additional specific considerations. A thorough medication history assessment is essential, yet often challenging. Many patients fail to recognize, report, or accurately disclose their use of antithrombotic agents [20]. Critical pre-procedural assessments include determining the timing of the last antithrombotic dose, validating the INR in anticoagulant users, and obtaining the creatinine level for DOAC users because renal impairment, particularly for dabigatran, prolongs elimination.

Current evidence is reassuring regarding the safety of diagnostic endoscopy with biopsy (Table 1 and Fig. 1) [21,22]. Diagnostic endoscopy with biopsy is classified as a low-risk hemorrhage procedure across all major guidelines [8,23-25]. The British Society of Gastroenterology and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines specifically note no increased bleeding risk with aspirin, clopidogrel, or warfarin continuation for biopsy [23]. Guidelines for DOACs suggest omitting the morning dose on the day of the procedure as a precautionary measure, although supporting data remain limited [23,25].

TREATMENT AND PREVENTION

Anti-ulcer therapy

Acid-suppressive therapy forms the cornerstone of ulcer treatment and prevention, following the same protocols used in non-user of antithrombotic agents [26]. For uncomplicated PUD, standard-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for 4–8 weeks could achieve ulcer healing in most cases. Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P‑CABs), such as vonoprazan and tegoprazan, represent a new class of antisecretory agents that provide more rapid and consistent acid suppression, independent of the CYP2C19 genotype [26]. Tegoprazan, commercially available in Korea, is a benzimidazole derivative with a potent and reversible K⁺/H⁺-ATPase inhibitory effect, which has demonstrated efficacy in gastric ulcer treatment [27,28].

Mucoprotective agents are adjunctive therapeutic strategies that enhance mucosal defense mechanisms through prostaglandin-independent and prostaglandin-dependent pathways [29]. Traditional agents, such as sucralfate and misoprostol, have been used for gastric mucosal protection, whereas newer agents, including rebamipide, teprenone, and eupatilin, are increasingly prescribed in clinical practice, particularly in East Asian countries [30].

Management of peptic ulcer bleeding

Bleeding is the most common PUD-associated complication. Aspirin confers an increased risk of upper GI bleeding, with a clear dose-response relationship [31,32]. The risk of bleeding further increases with the addition of clopidogrel, anticoagulants, NSAIDs, or steroids and in old age [33-36]. Anticoagulants do not directly cause gastric mucosal injury but can promote bleeding from pre-existing lesions [37-39].

The management of antithrombotic therapy in GI bleeding represents the most complex aspect of care, requiring the integration of bleeding and thromboembolic risk (Fig. 2) [40]. For thrombotic risk assessment, the CHA₂DS₂-VASc score guides anticoagulation decisions in atrial fibrillation (scores ≥2 mandate anticoagulation) [8]. Concurrent HAS-BLED scores ≥3 indicate high bleeding risk that requires careful monitoring [41-43]. The risk of thromboembolism associated with anticoagulant discontinuation depends largely on the underlying disease for which the anticoagulant was indicated [25]. High thrombotic risk scenarios requiring antithrombotic treatment include recent cardioembolic stroke within 3 months, recent venous thromboembolism within 3 months, atrial fibrillation with rheumatic valvular heart disease, mechanical heart valve, CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥6, and severe thrombophilia [25,44,45]. In patients with acute coronary syndrome, the risk of stent thrombosis is highest in the first 4 to 6 weeks after coronary artery stenting with bare metal stent and in the first 3 months after drug-eluting stent implantation [8,44,45]. These patients require antithrombotic therapy despite the risk of bleeding. Since thromboembolic risk increases substantially when both antiplatelet agents are discontinued during DAPT [46], current guidelines recommend continuing aspirin if P2Y12 receptor inhibitor interruption is necessary [23-25,47].

The evidence in the literature to guide the proper timing of restarting antithrombotic agents in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding is limited. Guidelines strongly recommend restarting aspirin and thienopyridine, including clopidogrel, for secondary prevention of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular diseases, as soon as endoscopic hemostasis is confirmed [25,44]. For DAPT, aspirin should be continued without interruption, when possible, with P2Y12 receptor inhibitor resumption at proper timing based on bleeding risk assessment [25,37]. In most cases of GI bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation indicated for anticoagulation therapy, restarting oral anticoagulants after the hemorrhage can have a positive net clinical benefit, particularly in those at the highest thromboembolic risk [48]. Therefore, anticoagulants should be resumed as soon as possible for patients who need long-term anticoagulation once peptic ulcer bleeding has been successfully controlled [25,44].

The timing of resumption should be individualized based on the pharmacokinetic properties of specific agents, the severity of the bleeding episode, and the urgency of restoring anticoagulation, often necessitating multidisciplinary consultation with a cardiologist or neurologist. Considering that the onset of antiplatelet activity usually requires 3–5 days after the resumption of its administration, antiplatelet agent should be resumed as soon as possible if adequate hemostasis is achieved [37]. As the onset time of prasugrel or ticagrelor is fast and the antiplatelet potency is greater than that of clopidogrel, the timing of restarting these P2Y12 receptor inhibitors should be determined carefully [23,49]. When warfarin is restarted after interruption, achieving full anticoagulant effects can require several days. Therefore, warfarin can be restarted at the previous therapeutic dose once hemostasis is achieved. In most patients, peak levels and a therapeutic anticoagulation effect are achieved within several hours after DOAC initiation. DOACs should be resumed when full anticoagulation is clinically appropriate once adequate hemostasis has been secured [25,45]. The guidelines also underscore the need for standardized bleeding and thrombotic risk assessment through multidisciplinary collaboration and the establishment of institutional protocols for consistent management across specialties.

Long-term preventive strategies

The prevention of ulcer recurrence in patients requiring ongoing antithrombotic therapy centers on PPI maintenance and H. pylori eradication. The guidelines recommend PPI therapy in combination with antiplatelet therapy in patients with a history of peptic ulcer (Table 2) [36,37,40,44,50-52]. Specifically, the 2020 revised Korean guidelines strongly recommend PPI co-therapy for patients with long-term low-dose aspirin therapy for secondary prevention with a history of peptic ulcer [44]. Robust evidence supports PPI maintenance in patients with antiplatelet therapy. A randomized trial demonstrated that lansoprazole in addition to H. pylori eradication therapy significantly reduced the recurrence in long-term low-dose aspirin users [53]. Another randomized trial demonstrated that aspirin plus esomeprazole resulted in a cumulative incidence of recurrent bleeding rate of only 0.7% versus 8.6% with clopidogrel alone in patients who took aspirin to prevent vascular diseases, confirming that PPI co-therapy with aspirin is superior to switching to an alternative antiplatelet agent [54]. The Clopidogrel and the Optimization of Gastrointestinal Events Trial confirmed an 87% relative reduction in overt upper GI bleeding with omeprazole co-administration in patients on DAPT [55]. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials have also demonstrated that PPIs are effective in reducing PUD and ulcer bleeding in low-dose aspirin ulcers [56].

PPI therapy is also recommended in high-risk patients (history of PUD and concomitant use of antiplatelet agents and NSAIDs) taking anticoagulants to prevent GI bleeding [37,44,51,52]. An observational study demonstrated that concomitant use of PPIs in oral anticoagulant users was associated with a 34% risk reduction in hospitalization for upper GI bleeding [57]. Another retrospective cohort study reported that PPI and histamine 2-receptor antagonists significantly reduced the risk of upper GI bleeding in patients taking dabigatran with a history of peptic ulcers or GI bleeding [58]. A recent meta-analysis also indicated that PPI co-therapy in anticoagulant users was associated with a lower total and major GI bleeding [59]. For patients on anticoagulants, the COMPASS trial, which investigated pantoprazole versus placebo in patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease who were treated with aspirin, rivaroxaban, or both, provided important nuance [60]. In this study, routine pantoprazole did not significantly reduce composite upper GI events compared with placebo but significantly reduced bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions. Thus, the benefits of PPI are greater in patients with additional GI risk factors than in all patients receiving anticoagulants.

The potential interaction between clopidogrel and PPIs has generated substantial concern because the conversion of clopidogrel to its active metabolite and the metabolism of certain PPIs depend on common CYP isoenzymes, mainly CYP2C19 [36]. Several studies have reported that clopidogrel-induced platelet inhibition is attenuated with the use of certain PPIs, a pharmacodynamic effect that is most pronounced with omeprazole [61,62]. In line with this, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a boxed warning in March 2010 advising against concomitant use of clopidogrel with omeprazole or esomeprazole, citing reduced effectiveness in CYP2C19 poor metabolizers [63]. Nonetheless, results from a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial have indicated no significant differences in ischemic events between omeprazole and placebo among patients treated with clopidogrel, although PPI use markedly decreased the risk of GI bleeding [55]. Moreover, post hoc analyses from several randomized trials have shown that ischemic risk is not increased when a clinically indicated PPI is used with clopidogrel [64,65]. The PLATO sub-study revealed the association of PPI use with similar cardiovascular risk in both clopidogrel and ticagrelor groups despite ticagrelor not requiring CYP2C19 activation, thus strongly suggesting confounding rather than true drug interaction [66].

P‑CABs represent an alternative class of antisecretory agents with CYP2C19-independent acid suppression [26]. A randomized trial demonstrated that vonoprazan was non-inferior to lansoprazole in preventing ulcer recurrence in patients with a history of peptic ulcer requiring long-term low-dose aspirin therapy [67]. However, contrary to initial expectations based on in vitro CYP2C19 inhibition data, a clinical pharmacokinetic study demonstrated that compared with esomeprazole, vonoprazan attenuated clopidogrel-induced platelet inhibition more potently across all CYP2C19 genotype groups [68]. The U.S. FDA also classifies vonoprazan as a CYP2C19 inhibitor and warns that co-administration may reduce plasma concentrations of the active metabolite of clopidogrel, resulting in reduced platelet inhibition [69]. The current international guidelines have not yet specifically recommended P‑CABs for gastroprotection in patients on antithrombotic therapy.

H. pylori eradication is another important aspect of PUD management that allows healing and reduces recurrence, and is also indicated in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy. The 2020 revised Korean guideline strongly recommends H. pylori eradication in patients with a history of PUD receiving long-term low-dose aspirin therapy to prevent peptic ulcer and its complications [44]. This approach is based on studies demonstrating that successful H. pylori eradication significantly reduces the recurrence of ulcer complications in long-term aspirin users [70,71].

CONCLUSION

As the burden of cardio-cerebrovascular disease continues to rise, an increasing number of patients require long-term antithrombotic therapy and are consequently at elevated risk of GI complications. The epidemiology of PUD has fundamentally shifted from H. pylori infection to a drug-induced etiology, making the assessment of antithrombotic medication history as important as H. pylori testing in diagnostic evaluation. The management of PUD in patients taking antithrombotic agents requires sophisticated integration of GI bleeding risk, thrombotic risk, pharmacological interactions, and guideline recommendations from multiple specialties. It is imperative to balance these competing risks through multidisciplinary collaboration. In high-risk patients, long-term prevention of recurrence relies primarily on H. pylori eradication and concomitant PPI therapy in those receiving antithrombotic agents. As the population ages and antithrombotic indications continue to expand, this complex patient population will continue to grow, making mastery of these management principles essential for contemporary gastroenterology practice.

Notes

Authors’ Contribution

Conceptualization: Eun Jeong Gong. Data curation: Eun Jeong Gong, Chang Seok Bang. Formal analysis: Eun Jeong Gong, Chang Seok Bang. Investigation: Eun Jeong Gong, Chang Seok Bang. Methodology: Eun Jeong Gong, Chang Seok Bang. Project administration: Eun Jeong Gong. Resources: Eun Jeong Gong. Software: Chang Seok Bang. Supervision: Eun Jeong Gong. Validation: Eun Jeong Gong. Visualization: Eun Jeong Gong. Writing—original draft: Eun Jeong Gong, Chang Seok Bang. Writing—review & editing: Eun Jeong Gong. Approval of final manuscript: Eun Jeong Gong, Chang Seok Bang.

Availability of Data and Material

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

Funding Statement

None

Acknowledgements

None

Fig. 1.

Management of antithrombotic agents for elective endoscopic procedures. *Warfarin can be resumed on the evening of the procedure for most patients at the patient’s usual maintenance dose. CrCl, creatinine clearance; DAPT, dual antiplatelet agent; DOACs, direct oral anticoagulants.

Fig. 2.

Management of antithrombotic agents in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding with high risk (A), and low risk (B) endoscopic stigmata. DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy; DOACs, direct oral anticoagulants; P‑CAB, potassium-competitive acid blocker; PPI, proton pump inhibitor.

Table 1.

Recommendation for stopping antithrombotic agents before elective endoscopic procedures with low and high risk of bleeding

	Low-risk procedures	High-risk procedures
	Diagnostic endoscopy with/without biopsy	Polypectomy (>1 cm)
	Cold snare polypectomy of colon polyp ≤1 cm	EUS with needle aspiration or biopsy
	EUS without needle aspiration or biopsy	ERCP with sphincterotomy
	ERCP with stent placement or papillary balloon dilation	Dilation of strictures
	Diagnostic enteroscopy	Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy or jejunostomy
	Capsule endoscopy	Injection or band ligation of varices
	Enteral stenting without significant dilation	Endoscopic hemostasis
		EMR/ESD
		Endoscopic papillectomy
		POEM
		Tumor ablation or coagulation
Aspirin	Continue	Continue (consider stopping before ultra-high-risk procedures^*)
P2Y12 receptor inhibitors	Continue	Stop 5–7 days before (5 days for clopidogrel and ticagrelor, and 7 days for prasugrel)
DAPT	Continue	Stop P2Y12 receptor inhibitors 5–7 days before, continue aspirin
Warfarin	Continue	Low thromboembolic risk: stop 5 days before
		Heparin bridging is recommended only in patients with high thromboembolic risk
DOACs	Omit morning dose	Stop 2–4 days before^†

^* Ultra-high-risk procedures include ESD, EMR of large colon polyps (≥2 cm), endoscopic papillectomy25;

^† Evaluating creatinine clearance and DOAC type.

DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy; DOACs, direct oral anticoagulants; EMR, endoscopic mucosal resection; ERCP, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; ESD, endoscopic submucosal dissection; EUS, endoscopic ultrasonography; POEM, peroral endoscopic myotomy.

Table 2.

Recommendations regarding proton pump inhibitor co-therapy in patients with antithrombotic therapy

Guideline	Statement	Class of recommendation	Level of evidence
ACCF/ACG/AHA 2008 expert consensus document on reducing the GI risk of antiplatelet therapy and NSAID use [40]
	The combination of ASA and anticoagulant therapy (including unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, and warfarin) is associated with a clinically meaningful and significantly increased risk of major extracranial bleeding events, a large proportion from the upper GI tract. This combination should be used with established vascular, arrhythmic, or vascular indication; patients should receive concomitant PPIs as well.	Expert consensus
	PPIs are the preferred agents for the therapy and prophylaxis of NSAID- and ASA-associated GI injury.	Expert consensus
ACCF/ACG/AHA 2010 expert consensus document on the concomitant use of PPIs and thienopyridines: a focused update of the 2008 expert consensus document [36]
	Use of a PPI or H2RA reduces the risk of upper GI bleeding compared with no therapy. PPIs reduce upper GI bleeding to a greater degree than do H2RAs.	Expert consensus
	PPIs are recommended to reduce GI bleeding in patients with a history of upper GI bleeding. PPIs are appropriate in patients with multiple risk factors for GI bleeding who require antiplatelet therapy.	Expert consensus
	Routine use of either a PPI or an H2RA is not recommended for patients at lower risk of upper GI bleeding, who have much less potential to benefit from prophylactic therapy.	Expert consensus
	Clinical decisions regarding concomitant use of PPIs and thienopyridines must balance overall risks and benefits, considering both cardiovascular and GI complications.	Expert consensus
2017 ESC focused update on DAPT in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS [50]
	A PPI in combination with DAPT is recommended.	I^*	B^†
Clinical guidelines for drug-related peptic ulcers, 2020 revised edition [44]
	We recommend that patients who have a history of PU receiving long-term LDA therapy are co-administered PPI to prevent PU and rebleeding.	Strong for	Moderate
	We suggest high-risk patients who are taking anticoagulants to be administered PPIs to prevent upper GI hemorrhage.	Weak for	low
Endoscopic diagnosis and management of NVUGIH, ESGE guideline update 2021 [37]
	ESGE recommends that in patients who have had acute NVUGIH and require ongoing DAPT, PPI should be given as co-therapy.	Strong	Moderate
	ESGE recommends PPIs for gastroduodenal prophylaxis in patients requiring ongoing anticoagulation and with a history of NVUGIH.	Strong	Low
2023 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes [51]
	Therapy with a PPI is indicated for patients receiving any antithrombotic regimen who are at high risk of GI bleeding.	No corresponding recommendation was made
2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI guidelines for the management of patients with acute coronary syndrome [52]
	In patients at high risk of GI bleeding, a PPI is recommended in combination with DAPT, oral anticoagulants, or both to reduce risk of bleeding.	I^*	A^†

^* Class of recommendation is graded as I, II, or III in this guideline;

^† Level of evidence is graded as A, B, or C in this guideline.

ACC, The American College of Cardiology; ACCF, The American College of Cardiology Foundation; ACEP, The American College of Emergency Physicians; ACG, The American College of Gastroenterology; AHA, The American Heart Association; ASA, acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin); DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy; EACTS, The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery; ESC, The European Society of Cardiology; ESGE, The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; GI, gastrointestinal; H2RA, histamine H₂ receptor antagonist; LDA, lowdose aspirin; NAEMSP, National Association of EMS Physicians; NSAID, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; NVUGIH, nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage; PPI, proton pump inhibitor; PU, peptic ulcer; SCAI, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions.

REFERENCES

1. Lau ISF, Chan FKL, Lau JYW. Peptic ulcer disease. In: Chung RT, Rubin DT, Wilcox M, eds. Sleisenger and Fordtran’s gastrointestinal and liver disease. Vol. 1. 12th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2026:882-896.e4.

2. Yandrapu H, Sarosiek J. Protective factors of the gastric and duodenal mucosa: an overview. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2015;17:24.

3. Almadi MA, Lu Y, Alali AA, Barkun AN. Peptic ulcer disease. Lancet 2024;404:68–81.

4. Malfertheiner P, Chan FK, McColl KE. Peptic ulcer disease. Lancet 2009;374:1449–1461.

5. Huang JQ, Sridhar S, Hunt RH. Role of Helicobacter pylori infection and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in peptic-ulcer disease: a meta-analysis. Lancet 2002;359:14–22.

6. Papatheodoridis GV, Sougioultzis S, Archimandritis AJ. Effects of Helicobacter pylori and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on peptic ulcer disease: a systematic review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006;4:130–142.

7. Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risks 2023 Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of cardiovascular diseases and risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2023. J Am Coll Cardiol 2025;86:2167–2243.

8. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee; Acosta RD, Abraham NS, Chandrasekhara V, et al. The management of antithrombotic agents for patients undergoing GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;83:3–16.

9. Patrono C, Baigent C. Role of aspirin in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Nat Rev Cardiol 2019;16:675–686.

10. Vane JR, Botting RM. The mechanism of action of aspirin. Thromb Res 2003;110:255–258.

11. Capodanno D, Ferreiro JL, Angiolillo DJ. Antiplatelet therapy: new pharmacological agents and changing paradigms. J Thromb Haemost 2013;11(Suppl 1): 316–329.

12. Ansell J, Hirsh J, Hylek E, Jacobson A, Crowther M, Palareti G. Pharmacology and management of the vitamin K antagonists: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th edition). Chest 2008;133(6 Suppl): 160S–198S.

13. Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2014;383:955–962.

14. Kim YS, Lee J, Shin A, Lee JM, Park JH, Jung HY. A nationwide cohort study shows a sex-dependent change in the trend of peptic ulcer bleeding incidence in Korea between 2006 and 2015. Gut Liver 2021;15:537–545.

15. Kozieł M, Teutsch C, Bayer V, et al. Changes in anticoagulant prescription patterns over time for patients with atrial fibrillation around the world. J Arrhythm 2021;37:990–1006.

16. Kwon S, Jung JH, Choi EK, et al. Impact of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants on the change of antithrombotic regimens in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Korean Circ J 2021;51:409–422.

17. Navar AM, Kolkailah AA, Overton R, et al. Trends in oral anticoagulant use among 436 864 patients with atrial fibrillation in community practice, 2011 to 2020. J Am Heart Assoc 2022;11:e026723.

18. Choi MH. The endoscopic diagnosis of peptic ulcer disease. Korean J Helicobacter Up Gastrointest Res 2014;14:6–12.

19. Laine L, Jensen DM. Management of patients with ulcer bleeding. Am J Gastroenterol 2012;107:345–360. quiz 361.

20. Wai A, Salib M, Aran S, Edwards J, Patanwala AE. Accuracy of patient self-administered medication history forms in the emergency department. Am J Emerg Med 2020;38:50–54.

21. Whitson MJ, Dikman AE, von Althann C, et al. Is gastroduodenal biopsy safe in patients receiving aspirin and clopidogrel?: a prospective, randomized study involving 630 biopsies. J Clin Gastroenterol 2011;45:228–233.

22. Yuki T, Ishihara S, Yashima K, et al. Bleeding risk related to upper gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy: a multicenter prospective observational study. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp 2017;84:32–36.

23. Veitch AM, Radaelli F, Alikhan R, et al. Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update. Gut 2021;70:1611–1628.

24. Chan FKL, Goh KL, Reddy N, et al. Management of patients on antithrombotic agents undergoing emergency and elective endoscopy: joint Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE) and Asian Pacific Society for Digestive Endoscopy (APSDE) practice guidelines. Gut 2018;67:405–417.

25. Kang SJ, Tae CH, Bang CS, et al. International digestive endoscopy network consensus on the management of antithrombotic agents in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gut Liver 2024;18:764–780.

26. Yeom DH, Kim YS. [History and pharmacological mechanism of gastric acid-suppressive drugs]. Korean J Helicobacter Up Gastrointest Res 2023;23:159–166. Korean.

27. Park JK. [Optimal use of proton pump inhibitors and potassium-competitive acid blockers]. Korean J Helicobacter Up Gastrointest Res 2023;23:180–187. Korean.

28. Cho YK, Choi MG, Choi SC, et al. Randomised clinical trial: tegoprazan, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, or lansoprazole in the treatment of gastric ulcer. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2020;52:789–797.

29. Scally B, Emberson JR, Spata E, et al. Effects of gastroprotectant drugs for the prevention and treatment of peptic ulcer disease and its complications: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;3:231–241.

30. Kim SE. Mucoprotectants. Korean J Helicobacter Up Gastrointest Res 2022;22:108–118.

31. Derry S, Loke YK. Risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage with long term use of aspirin: meta-analysis. BMJ 2000;321:1183–1187.

32. Lanas Á, Carrera-Lasfuentes P, Arguedas Y, et al. Risk of upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding in patients taking nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, antiplatelet agents, or anticoagulants. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015;13:906–912.e2.

33. García Rodríguez LA, Lin KJ, Hernández-Díaz S, Johansson S. Risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding with low-dose acetylsalicylic acid alone and in combination with clopidogrel and other medications. Circulation 2011;123:1108–1115.

34. Diener HC, Bogousslavsky J, Brass LM, et al. Aspirin and clopidogrel compared with clopidogrel alone after recent ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack in high-risk patients (MATCH): randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2004;364:331–337.

35. Mahady SE, Margolis KL, Chan A, et al. Major GI bleeding in older persons using aspirin: incidence and risk factors in the ASPREE randomised controlled trial. Gut 2021;70:717–724.

36. Abraham NS, Hlatky MA, Antman EM, et al. ACCF/ACG/AHA 2010 expert consensus document on the concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors and thienopyridines: a focused update of the ACCF/ACG/AHA 2008 expert consensus document on reducing the gastrointestinal risks of antiplatelet therapy and NSAID use. A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:2051–2066.

37. Gralnek IM, Stanley AJ, Morris AJ, et al. Endoscopic diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline - update 2021. Endoscopy 2021;53:300–332.

38. Ingason AB, Hreinsson JP, Agustsson AS, et al. Warfarin is associated with higher rates of upper but not lower gastrointestinal bleeding compared with direct oral anticoagulants: a population-based propensity-weighted cohort study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023;21:347–357.e10.

39. Gu ZC, Wei AH, Zhang C, et al. Risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding with new vs conventional oral anticoagulants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020;18:792–799.e61.

40. Bhatt DL, Scheiman J, Abraham NS, et al. ACCF/ACG/AHA 2008 expert consensus document on reducing the gastrointestinal risks of antiplatelet therapy and NSAID use: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents. Circulation 2008;118:1894–1909.

41. Lane DA, Lip GY. Use of the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores to aid decision making for thromboprophylaxis in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Circulation 2012;126:860–865.

42. Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, et al. 2020 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): the task force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 2021;42:373–498.

43. January CT, Wann LS, Calkins H, et al. 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:104–132.

44. Joo MK, Park CH, Kim JS, et al. Clinical guidelines for drug-related peptic ulcer, 2020 revised edition. Gut Liver 2020;14:707–726.

45. Thompson A, Fleischmann KE, Smilowitz NR, et al. 2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM guideline for perioperative cardiovascular management for noncardiac surgery: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice guidelines. Circulation 2024;150:e351–e442.

46. Eisenberg MJ, Richard PR, Libersan D, Filion KB. Safety of short-term discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy in patients with drug-eluting stents. Circulation 2009;119:1634–1642.

47. Abraham NS, Barkun AN, Sauer BG, et al. American College of Gastroenterology-Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice guideline: management of anticoagulants and antiplatelets during acute gastrointestinal bleeding and the periendoscopic period. Am J Gastroenterol 2022;117:542–558.

48. Kotalczyk A, Mazurek M, Kalarus Z, Potpara TS, Lip GYH. Stroke prevention strategies in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation. Nat Rev Cardiol 2021;18:276–290.

49. Park Y, Her AY, Kim HK, et al. Consensus document on perioperative antithrombotic management: part 1. a review. Korean J Med 2022;97:150–163.

50. Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Byrne RA, et al. 2017 ESC focused update on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS: the task force for dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 2018;39:213–260.

51. Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ, et al. 2023 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 2023;44:3720–3826.

52. Rao SV, O’Donoghue ML, Ruel M, et al. 2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI guideline for the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice guidelines. Circulation 2025;151:e771–e862.

53. Lai KC, Lam SK, Chu KM, et al. Lansoprazole for the prevention of recurrences of ulcer complications from long-term low-dose aspirin use. N Engl J Med 2002;346:2033–2038.

54. Chan FK, Ching JY, Hung LC, et al. Clopidogrel versus aspirin and esomeprazole to prevent recurrent ulcer bleeding. N Engl J Med 2005;352:238–244.

55. Bhatt DL, Cryer BL, Contant CF, et al. Clopidogrel with or without omeprazole in coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2010;363:1909–1917.

56. Mo C, Sun G, Lu ML, et al. Proton pump inhibitors in prevention of low-dose aspirin-associated upper gastrointestinal injuries. World J Gastroenterol 2015;21:5382–5392.

57. Ray WA, Chung CP, Murray KT, et al. Association of oral anticoagulants and proton pump inhibitor cotherapy with hospitalization for upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding. JAMA 2018;320:2221–2230.

58. Chan EW, Lau WC, Leung WK, et al. Prevention of dabigatran-related gastrointestinal bleeding with gastroprotective agents: a population-based study. Gastroenterology 2015;149:586–595.e3.

59. Ahn HJ, Lee SR, Choi EK, et al. Protective effect of proton-pump inhibitor against gastrointestinal bleeding in patients receiving oral anticoagulants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2022;88:4676–4687.

60. Moayyedi P, Eikelboom JW, Bosch J, et al. Pantoprazole to prevent gastroduodenal events in patients receiving rivaroxaban and/or aspirin in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Gastroenterology 2019;157:403–412.e5.

61. Gilard M, Arnaud B, Cornily JC, et al. Influence of omeprazole on the antiplatelet action of clopidogrel associated with aspirin: the randomized, double-blind OCLA (Omeprazole CLopidogrel Aspirin) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:256–260.

62. Sibbing D, Morath T, Stegherr J, et al. Impact of proton pump inhibitors on the antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel. Thromb Haemost 2009;101:714–719.

63. FDA press release. FDA Drug Safety Communication: reduced effectiveness of Plavix (clopidogrel) in patients who are poor metabolizers of the drug, 2010 March 12 [accessed on December 30, 2025]. Available from: https://web.archive.org/web/20240204123258/https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patientsand-providers/fda-drug-safety-communication-reduced-effectiveness-plavix-clopidogrel-patients-who-are-poor.

64. Gargiulo G, Costa F, Ariotti S, et al. Impact of proton pump inhibitors on clinical outcomes in patients treated with a 6- or 24-month dual-antiplatelet therapy duration: insights from the PROlonging Dual-antiplatelet treatment after Grading stent-induced Intimal hyperplasia studY trial. Am Heart J 2016;174:95–102.

65. O’Donoghue ML, Braunwald E, Antman EM, et al. Pharmacodynamic effect and clinical efficacy of clopidogrel and prasugrel with or without a proton-pump inhibitor: an analysis of two randomised trials. Lancet 2009;374:989–997.

66. Goodman SG, Clare R, Pieper KS, et al. Association of proton pump inhibitor use on cardiovascular outcomes with clopidogrel and ticagrelor: insights from the platelet inhibition and patient outcomes trial. Circulation 2012;125:978–986.

67. Kawai T, Oda K, Funao N, et al. Vonoprazan prevents low-dose aspirin-associated ulcer recurrence: randomised phase 3 study. Gut 2018;67:1033–1041.

68. Kagami T, Yamade M, Suzuki T, et al. Comparative study of effects of vonoprazan and esomeprazole on antiplatelet function of clopidogrel or prasugrel in relation to CYP2C19 genotype. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2018;103:906–913.

69. Phathom Pharmaceuticals, Inc. VOQUEZNA (vonoprazan) tablets prescribing information. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2023 [accessed on December 30, 2025] Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2023/215151s000lbl.pdf.

70. Chan FK, Chung SC, Suen BY, et al. Preventing recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with Helicobacter pylori infection who are taking low-dose aspirin or naproxen. N Engl J Med 2001;344:967–973.

71. Chan FK, Ching JY, Suen BY, Tse YK, Wu JC, Sung JJ. Effects of Helicobacter pylori infection on long-term risk of peptic ulcer bleeding in low-dose aspirin users. Gastroenterology 2013;144:528–535.