Efficacy Of Prokinetic Agents Research Articles

Efficacy of prokinetic agents in diabetic gastroparesis comparing symptomatology and scintigraphy - An open-label trial.

It is pertinent to objectively assess the severity of diabetic gastroparesis and tailor treatment accordingly. The current study was planned to document gastroparesis by gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) objectively and see the effect of medications and diet control on clinical and GES after four weeks. A prospective, open-label randomized trial was conducted in the Department of Internal Medicine at a tertiary care teaching hospital over twelve months. Type 2 diabetic patients aged 18-65 years diagnosed with a case of delayed gastric emptying by gastric scintigraphy were included. All baseline GSCI was recorded, and then they were allotted to 3 groups - Group-1 (Levosulpiride 25mg once daily), group-2 (Cinitapride 1mg thrice daily), and Group-3 (Waitlisted control) by block randomization and followed-up weekly till four weeks. After four weeks duration, if not improved clinically, then Group-3 on diet and diabetic control only, were randomized into Levosulpiride 25mg once daily (Group 1), and Cinitapride 1mg Thrice daily (Group 2) for the next four weeks. Forty confirmed cases with diabetic gastroparesis documented by Gastroparesis Symptom Cardinal Index (GCSI) scoring and later by Scintigraphy (GES) were included in this study. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the Levosulpiride and Cinitapride groups when all symptoms were taken into account. Levosulpiride was significantly more effective than Cinitapride in improving individual symptoms like nausea, vomiting, stomach fullness, and early satiety. Levosulpiride is better than Cinitapride in improving the symptoms of diabetic gastroparesis but no significant effect on gastric scintigraphy.

Prokinetics for the treatment of functional dyspepsia: Bayesian network meta-analysis

BackgroundControversies persist regarding the effect of prokinetics for the treatment of functional dyspepsia (FD). This study aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of prokinetic agents for the treatment of FD.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prokinetics for the treatment of FD were identified from core databases. Symptom response rates were extracted and analyzed using odds ratios (ORs). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method in WinBUGS and NetMetaXL.ResultsIn total, 25 RCTs, which included 4473 patients with FD who were treated with 6 different prokinetics or placebo, were identified and analyzed. Metoclopramide showed the best surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probability (92.5%), followed by trimebutine (74.5%) and mosapride (63.3%). However, the therapeutic efficacy of metoclopramide was not significantly different from that of trimebutine (OR:1.32, 95% credible interval: 0.27–6.06), mosapride (OR: 1.99, 95% credible interval: 0.87–4.72), or domperidone (OR: 2.04, 95% credible interval: 0.92–4.60). Metoclopramide showed better efficacy than itopride (OR: 2.79, 95% credible interval: 1.29–6.21) and acotiamide (OR: 3.07, 95% credible interval: 1.43–6.75). Domperidone (SUCRA probability 62.9%) showed better efficacy than itopride (OR: 1.37, 95% credible interval: 1.07–1.77) and acotiamide (OR: 1.51, 95% credible interval: 1.04–2.18).ConclusionsMetoclopramide, trimebutine, mosapride, and domperidone showed better efficacy for the treatment of FD than itopride or acotiamide. Considering the adverse events related to metoclopramide or domperidone, the short-term use of these agents or the alternative use of trimebutine or mosapride could be recommended for the symptomatic relief of FD.

Efficacy of Prokinetic Agents in Improving Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy

Background and Aim: Colonoscopy plays an important role in the diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal illness in both Western countries and Japan. However, preparative bowel cleansing for colonoscopy is frequently troublesome for elderly and/or constipated patients, since they must drink larger volumes of lavage solution for adequate cleansing. We investigated the use of prokinetic agents for improving the efficacy and tolerability of bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy. Methods: 613 patients were divided into two groups according to oral lavage solution used (polyethylene glycol or magnesium citrate), and were further randomized to receive either vehicle (100 ml water) alone, vehicle with 5 mg mosapride citrate, or vehicle with 50 mg itopride hydrochloride 30 min before administration of lavage solution. Experimental parameters included bowel cleansing quality, times to first defecation and completion of bowel cleansing, and incidence of uncomfortable abdominal symptoms during colonoscopy preparation. Results: Administration of mosapride citrate or itopride hydrochloride prior to oral lavage solution did not significantly improve bowel cleansing quality. However, statistically significantly fewer uncomfortable abdominal symptoms were found in patients who received mosapride citrate or itopride hydrochloride versus vehicle alone. Conclusion: Prokinetic agents effectively decreased the incidence of uncomfortable abdominal symptoms experienced during colonoscopy preparation.

Meta‐analysis of the effects of prokinetic agents in patients with functional dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is often treated with prokinetic agents; however, the efficacy of prokinetic agents in patients with FD has been questioned recently. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of the effects of prokinetic agents in patients with FD. Prokinetic agents, including metoclopramide, domperidone, trimebutine, cisapride, itopride and mosapride, used for treatment of FD between 1951 and 2005 were identified. Twenty-seven studies were selected. Difference in the probability of response between the interventional drug and placebo was used as a summary statistic for the treatment effect. Meta-regression analysis was used to detect sources of heterogeneity. In total, 1844 subjects were assigned to an experimental arm, and 1591 subjects were assigned to a placebo arm. Publication bias was ruled out by funnel plot and statistical testing (P = 0.975). In the overall analysis, the summary statistic was 0.295 (95% confidence interval: 0.208-0.382, P < 0.001), indicating that the interventional drug has 30% excess probability of producing a response compared with placebo. The most significant source of heterogeneity was the year of publication (P < 0.001). The data clearly indicate that prokinetic agents are significantly more effective than placebo in the treatment of FD. Although FD is a chronic condition, efficacy was assessed over short periods. Long-term randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the effect.

Efficacy of cisapride and domperidone in functional (nonulcer) dyspepsia: a meta-analysis

Background: The efficacy of prokinetic agents in functional (nonulcer) dyspepsia has been questioned based on recent trial results. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of cisapride and domperidone in functional dyspepsia. METHODS: Computer and manual searching was used to identify placebo-controlled studies that included >20 patients. The statistical analysis focused on: global assessment by the investigator, epigastric pain, early satiety, abdominal distension and nausea (all rated on four-point scales). Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) in favor of treatment. Regression analysis was performed to evaluate possible effect modifiers. The relationship between improvement in gastric emptying and symptoms was also evaluated. RESULTS: For cisapride, 17 studies met the inclusion criteria, but varying numbers of studies had to be used for the different outcome measures. For all outcome measures, there was a statiscally significant benefit in favor of cisapride: global assessment of improvement by the investigator or patient (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.5–5.8), epigastric pain (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.05–0.7), early satiety (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.9–0.4), abdominal distension (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.1–0.7), and nausea (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.1–0.5). Age of patient, year of publication, and country where study was performed had only small modifying effects. There were insufficient data to determine whether there is a relationship between improvement in gastric emptying and response to treatment. For domperidone, four of eight studies could be used for the analysis of global assessment of improvement by the investigator. This showed an OR of 7.0 (95% CI 3.6–16) in favor of domperidone. CONCLUSIONS: Both cisapride and domperidone seem to be efficacious in functional dyspepsia, although this conclusion is largely based on global assessment by the investigator, which may not be an optimal outcome measure.

Efficacy of cisapride and domperidone in functional (nonulcer) dyspepsia: a meta-analysis

The efficacy of prokinetic agents in functional (nonulcer) dyspepsia has been questioned based on recent trial results. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of cisapride and domperidone in functional dyspepsia. Computer and manual searching was used to identify placebo-controlled studies that included >20 patients. The statistical analysis focused on: global assessment by the investigator, epigastric pain, early satiety, abdominal distension and nausea (all rated on four-point scales). Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) in favor of treatment. Regression analysis was performed to evaluate possible effect modifiers. The relationship between improvement in gastric emptying and symptoms was also evaluated. For cisapride, 17 studies met the inclusion criteria, but varying numbers of studies had to be used for the different outcome measures. For all outcome measures, there was a statiscally significant benefit in favor of cisapride: global assessment of improvement by the investigator or patient (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.5-5.8), epigastric pain (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.05-0.7), early satiety (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.9-0.4), abdominal distension (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.1-0.7), and nausea (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.1-0.5). Age of patient, year of publication, and country where study was performed had only small modifying effects. There were insufficient data to determine whether there is a relationship between improvement in gastric emptying and response to treatment. For domperidone, four of eight studies could be used for the analysis of global assessment of improvement by the investigator. This showed an OR of 7.0 (95% CI 3.6-16) in favor of domperidone. Both cisapride and domperidone seem to be efficacious in functional dyspepsia, although this conclusion is largely based on global assessment by the investigator, which may not be an optimal outcome measure.

Role of prokinetic drugs for treatment of postoperative ileus in the horse

All horses undergoing coeliotomy for an acute abdominal crisis are at risk of developing ileus and should receive therapy aimed at promoting gastrointestinal function by restoring fluid and electrolyte balance. Adequate analgesia and prevention against peritonitis, bacteraemia and endotoxaemia should be provided. Horses that at the time of surgery have a strangulating or non-strangulating small intestinal obstruction should be considered to be at greater risk of developing a persistent ileus that is refractory to treatment than those horses with lesions involving the large intestine. In horses considered to be at greater risk of developing a persistent ileus, the use of prokinetic agents should be considered. Agents that may be used to improve gastrointestinal motility include adrenergic receptor antagonists, cholinergic agonists, benzamides, dopamine antagonists, macrolide antimicrobials, opiate receptor agonists and antagonists, somatostatin analogues and local anaesthetics. There are limited studies into the use of these agents in the horse. Until further research provides more information on motility disorders following intestinal surgery and the efficacy of prokinetic agents in this species, only selective use of some of these drugs can be recommended.