Efficacy and Safety of Enteral Erythromycin Estolate in Combination With Intravenous Metoclopramide vs Intravenous Metoclopramide Monotherapy in Mechanically Ventilated Patients With Enteral Feeding Intolerance: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Pilot Study

Last modified: October 1, 2021
You are here:
Estimated reading time: 1 min
Research Article: Efficacy and Safety of Enteral Erythromycin Estolate in Combination With Intravenous Metoclopramide vs Intravenous Metoclopramide Monotherapy in Mechanically Ventilated Patients With Enteral Feeding Intolerance: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Pilot Study
ผู้เขียน|Author: Taniya Charoensareerat, Rungsun Bhurayanontachai, Sirima Sitaruno, Asma Navasakulpong, Apinya Boonpeng, Sanguan Lerkiatbundit & Sutthiporn Pattharachayakul
Email: taniya.cha@siam.edu
Department|Faculty: Faculty of Pharmacy,  Siam University, Bangkok 10160
Published|แหล่งเผยแพร่: Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 2021 Aug;45(6):1309-1318.  doi: 10.1002/jpen.2013. Epub 2020 Oct 2

Citation

Charoensareerat T., Bhurayanontachai R., Sitaruno S., Navasakulpong A., Boonpeng A., Lerkiatbundit S. & Pattharachayakul S.. (2021). Efficacy and safety of enteral erythromycin estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide vs intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance: A randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study. Journal of Parenteral and Enteral, 45(6):1309-1318.


ABSTRACT

Background: In this pilot study, we aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of enteral erythromycin estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide compared to intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance.

Methods: This randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study included 35 mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance who were randomly assigned to receive 10-mg metoclopramide intravenously every 6–8 hours in combination with 250-mg enteral erythromycin estolate (study group) or placebo every 6 hours for 7 days. The primary outcome was an administered-to-target energy ratio of ≥80% at 48 hours, indicating a successful feeding. Secondary, prespecified outcomes were daily average gastric residual volume (GRV), total energy intake, administered-to-target energy ratio, hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and 28-day mortality.

Results: The rate of successful feeding was not significantly different between the study and placebo groups (47.1% and 61.1%, respectively; P = .51). The average daily GRV was significantly lower in the study group than in the placebo group (β = 91.58 [95% Wald CI, −164.35 to −18.8]), determined
by generalized estimating equation. Other secondary outcomes were comparable, and the incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the 2 groups. One common complication was cardiac arrhythmia, which was mostly self-terminated.

Conclusion: Although the combination therapy of enteral erythromycin estolate and intravenous metoclopramide reduced GRV, the successful feeding rate and other patient-specific outcomes did not improve in mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance. (JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2021;45:1309–1318)

Keywords: erythromycin estolate, feeding intolerance, gastric residual volume; mechanical ventilation; metoclopramide.


Efficacy and Safety of Enteral Erythromycin Estolate in Combination With Intravenous Metoclopramide vs Intravenous Metoclopramide Monotherapy in Mechanically Ventilated Patients With Enteral Feeding Intolerance: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Pilot Study

คณะเภสัชศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยสยาม | Faculty of Pharmacy, Siam University, Bangkok, Thailand

Tags:
Was this article helpful? บทความนี้เป็นประโยชน์หรือไม่?
ไม่ / Dislike 0
Views: 45
Previous: ปัจจัยที่มีความสัมพันธ์กับภาวะโภชนาการและการรู้คิดในผู้สูงอายุที่อาศัยในศูนย์พัฒนาการจัดสวัสดิการผู้สูงอายุ
Next: Will the Ratings and Reviews of Online Dietary Supplement Screen for Unsafe Products in the E-Marketplace