DOCSLIB.ORG

Efficacy of Drugs in Chronic Idiopathic Constipation: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Efficacy of Drugs in Chronic Idiopathic Constipation: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis This is a repository copy of Efficacy of drugs in chronic idiopathic constipation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/150676/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Luthra, P, Camilleri, M, Burr, NE orcid.org/0000-0003-1988-2982 et al. (3 more authors) (2019) Efficacy of drugs in chronic idiopathic constipation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. The lancet. Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 4 (11). pp. 831-844. ISSN 2468-1253 https://doi.org/10.1016/s2468-1253(19)30246-8 © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Luthra et al. 1 of 43 Accepted 2nd July 2019 TITLE PAGE Title: Efficacy of Pharmacological Therapies in Chronic Idiopathic Constipation: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Short running head: Network Meta-analysis of Pharmacological Therapies in Constipation. Authors: Pavit Luthra MBChB1, Professor Michael Camilleri MD2, Nicholas E. Burr MBBS3,4, Professor Eamonn MM Quigley MD5, Christopher J. Black MBBS*3,4, Professor Alexander C Ford MD*3,4. *Denotes joint last author 1Centre for Gastroenterology. Royal Free Hospital, London, UK. 2Clinical Enteric Neuroscience Translational and Epidemiological Research (C.E.N.T.E.R.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3Leeds Gastroenterology Institute, St. James’s University Hospital, Leeds, UK. 4Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St. James’s, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 5Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Lynda K. and David M. Underwood Center for Digestive Disorders, Houston Methodist Hospital and Weill Cornell Medical College, Houston, Texas, USA. Abbreviations: 5-HT 5-hydroxytryptamine b.i.d. twice daily Luthra et al. 2 of 43 CI confidence interval CIC chronic idiopathic constipation CSBM complete spontaneous bowel movement FDA Food and Drug Administration MeSH medical subject heading o.d. once daily PAC-QOL patient assessment of constipation quality of life RCT randomised controlled trial RR relative risk SBM spontaneous bowel movement Correspondence: Professor Alexander C. Ford Leeds Gastroenterology Institute Room 125 4th Floor Bexley Wing St. James’s University Hospital Beckett Street Leeds LS9 7TF UK email: [email protected] Telephone: 07887603665 Facsimile: 01133926968 Luthra et al. 3 of 43 Key words: CSBMs RCT comparison effectiveness treatment response Word count: 5023 Luthra et al. 4 of 43 SUMMARY Background: There are several pharmacological therapies available for the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC), but their relative efficacy is unclear because there have been no head-to-head randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a network meta- analysis to compare their efficacies in patients with CIC. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMBASE Classic, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials through June 2019 to identify RCTs assessing the efficacy of pharmacological therapies in adults with CIC. Trials included in the analysis reported a dichotomous assessment of overall response to therapy, and data were pooled using a random effects model. Efficacy and safety of all treatments were reported as a pooled relative risk with 95% CIs to summarise the effect of each comparison tested, and treatments were ranked according to their P-score. Findings: We identified 33 separate eligible RCTS of pharmacological therapies, containing 17,214 patients. Based on an endpoint of failure to achieve ≥3 complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBMs) per week, the stimulant diphenyl methane laxatives bisacodyl and sodium picosulfate, at a dose of 10mg once-daily, were ranked first at 4 weeks (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.63, P-score = 0.99), and prucalopride 2mg once-daily was ranked first at 12 weeks (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.86, P-score = 0.96). When failure to achieve an increase of ≥1 CSBM per week from baseline was used, again diphenyl methane laxatives at a dose of 10mg once-daily were ranked first at 4 weeks (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.54, P-score = 0.99), with prucalopride 4mg once-daily ranked first at 12 weeks (RR = 0.74; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.83, P-score 0.79), although linaclotide 290g once-daily and prucalopride 2mg once-daily performed similarly. Bisacodyl was ranked last in terms of safety for total number of adverse events and abdominal pain. Luthra et al. 5 of 43 Interpretation: Almost all pharmacological therapies studied were superior to placebo, according to either failure to achieve ≥3 CSBMs per week or an increase of ≥1 CSBM per week over baseline. Although diphenyl methane laxatives were ranked first for efficacy at 4 weeks, a milder spectrum of patients may have been treated in these trials. Prucalopride was ranked first at 12 weeks, and many of the included trials recruited patients who had previously failed laxatives, suggesting that this drug is likely to be the most efficacious for patients with CIC. However, since treatment duration in most trials was 4 to 12 weeks, the long term relative efficacy of these drugs is unknown. Funding: None. Luthra et al. 6 of 43 RESEARCH IN CONTEXT Evidence before this study Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) affects as many as 14% of the general population. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrate that laxatives and other newer pharmacological therapies are effective for the treatment of CIC. However, there is limited information concerning their relative efficacy. A previous systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs was published in 2017, but the literature search was done in 2015, and more RCTs have been published in the intervening 4 years, as well as trials of newer drugs. Added value of this study We have conducted a contemporaneous systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs reporting the effect of pharmacological therapies in CIC. Analyses according to different efficacy endpoints and duration of therapy were conducted, as well as effect on quality of life and adverse events. Implications of all the available evidence Diphenyl methane laxatives were ranked first for efficacy at 4 weeks, when failure to achieve either ≥3 CSBMs per week or an increase of ≥1 CSBM per week over baseline were used to define response to therapy, and were superior to almost all other treatments. However, trials of these drugs may have recruited a milder spectrum of patients, who were not laxative resistant. At 12 weeks of treatment, prucalopride 2mg or 4mg o.d. were ranked first, and appeared superior to several other drugs and dosages. As most RCTs were of 4 to 12 weeks duration, the longer term efficacy of these treatments is unknown. Luthra et al. 7 of 43 INTRODUCTION Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) is a chronic functional disorder of the lower gastrointestinal tract, characterised by persistently difficult, infrequent, or incomplete defecation, in the absence of any physiological abnormality. (1) The condition is common; a previous meta-analysis of cross-sectional community-based surveys estimated the prevalence worldwide at 14%. (2) As many as one-in-five people with symptoms compatible with CIC will consult a physician, (3) and the impact on quality of life for patients is comparable with that for organic conditions, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, and depression. (4) In a burden of illness study in the USA, constipation accounted for 3 million ambulatory visits and 800,000 emergency room visits. (5) Costs in the USA are estimated to be between $2000 and $7500 per patient per year. (6) Patients with CIC are often told to increase their dietary fibre intake in order to alleviate symptoms, but randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence to support this strategy is lacking. (7) Although both osmotic and stimulant laxatives are beneficial for the treatment of CIC, (8) many patients report dissatisfaction with their efficacy and safety. (9) Other pharmacological therapies for the disorder have therefore been developed. Agonists at the 5- hydroxytryptamine-4 (5-HT4) receptor, such as tegaserod, naronapride, prucalopride, and velusetrag increase colonic motility and transit. (10, 11) Secretagogues such as lubiprostone, linaclotide, and plecanatide are drugs that act by stimulating intestinal fluid secretion, thereby accelerating gastrointestinal transit. (12, 13) Elobixibat is an inhibitor of the ileal bile acid transporter, which leads to delivery of bile acids into the colon, where they are deconjugated and increase colonic motility and secretion. (14) Finally, mizagliflozin and tenapanor are drugs that act on sodium-glucose co-transporters and sodium-hydrogen exchangers, respectively. Both drugs appear to have effects on stool consistency in healthy volunteers. (15, 16) Luthra et al. 8 of 43 Many of these pharmacological therapies, including osmotic and stimulant laxatives, have been tested in placebo-controlled trials, but their relative efficacy was unknown, until recently, because head-to-head trials are lacking. A network meta-analysis, published in 2017, (17) attempted to circumvent this limitation in the available evidence by making indirect treatment comparisons between all active therapies tested in placebo-controlled trials, up to March 2015. These included prucalopride, tegaserod, velusetrag, lubiprostone, linaclotide, bisacodyl, sodium picosulfate, and elobixibat.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Review Article: Diagnosis, Management and Patient Perspectives of the Spectrum of Constipation Disorders
    Thomas Jefferson University Jefferson Digital Commons Department of Pharmacology and Experimental Department of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics Faculty Papers Therapeutics 6-1-2021 Review article: diagnosis, management and patient perspectives of the spectrum of constipation disorders. Amol Sharma Satish S C Rao Kimberly Kearns Kimberly D Orleck Scott A Waldman Follow this and additional works at: https://jdc.jefferson.edu/petfp Part of the Gastroenterology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Jefferson Digital Commons. The Jefferson Digital Commons is a service of Thomas Jefferson University's Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL). The Commons is a showcase for Jefferson books and journals, peer-reviewed scholarly publications, unique historical collections from the University archives, and teaching tools. The Jefferson Digital Commons allows researchers and interested readers anywhere in the world to learn about and keep up to date with Jefferson scholarship. This article has been accepted for inclusion in Department of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics Faculty Papers by an authorized administrator of the Jefferson Digital Commons. For more information, please contact: [email protected]. Received: 8 December 2020 | First decision: 24 December 2020 | Accepted: 31 March 2021 DOI: 10.1111/apt.16369 Review article: diagnosis, management and patient perspectives of the spectrum of constipation disorders Amol Sharma1 | Satish S. C. Rao1 | Kimberly Kearns2 | Kimberly D. Orleck3 | Scott A. Waldman4 1Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta Summary University, Augusta, GA, USA Background: Chronic constipation is a common, heterogeneous disorder with multi- 2 DuPage Medical Group, Hoffman Estates, ple symptoms and pathophysiological mechanisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Peptide Therapeutics Designing a Science-Led Strategic Quality Control Program
    BioProcess International Peptide SPECIAL REPORT Therapeutics Designing a Science-Led Strategic Quality Control Program INTERTEK PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES Your partner for regulatory-driven, phase appropriate analytical programs tailored to your molecule. Our experts help you to navigate the challenges of development, regulatory submission, and manufacturing. Peptide Therapeutics Designing a Science-Led Strategic Quality Control Program Shashank Sharma and Hannah Lee ince the emergence of peptide therapeutics in the 1920s with the advent of insulin therapy, the market for this product class has continued to expand with global revenues anticipatedS to surpass US$50 billion by 2024 (1). The growth of peptide therapeutics is attributed not only to improvements in manufacturing, but also to a rise in demand because of an increasingly aging population that is driving an increase in the occurrence of long-term diseases. The need for efficient and low-cost drugs and rising investments in research and development of novel drugs continues to boost market growth and fuel the emergence of generic versions that offer patients access to vital medicines at low costs. North America has been the dominant market for peptide therapeutics, with the Asia–Pacific region Insulin molecular model; the first therapeutic expected to grow at a faster rate. The global peptides use of this peptide hormone was in the market has attracted the attention of key players 1920s to treat diabetic patients. within the pharmaceutical industry, including Teva Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, amino acids to be peptides. Within that set, those Takeda, and Amgen. Those companies have made containing 10 or more are classed as polypeptides.
    [Show full text]
  • Linaclotide: a Novel Therapy for Chronic Constipation and Constipation- Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome Brian E
    Linaclotide: A Novel Therapy for Chronic Constipation and Constipation- Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome Brian E. Lacy, PhD, MD, John M. Levenick, MD, and Michael D. Crowell, PhD, FACG Dr. Lacy is Section Chief of Gastroenter- Abstract: Chronic constipation and irritable bowel syndrome ology and Hepatology and Dr. Levenick (IBS) are functional gastrointestinal disorders that significantly is a Gastroenterology Fellow in the affect patients’ quality of life. Chronic constipation and IBS are Division of Gastroenterology and prevalent—12% of the US population meet the diagnostic crite- Hepatology at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon, New ria for IBS, and 15% meet the criteria for chronic constipation— Hampshire. Dr. Crowell is a Professor and these conditions negatively impact the healthcare system of Medicine in the Division of from an economic perspective. Despite attempts at dietary Gastroenterology and Hepatology at modification, exercise, or use of over-the-counter medications, Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona. many patients have persistent symptoms. Alternative treatment options are limited. This article describes linaclotide (Linzess, Address correspondence to: Dr. Brian E. Lacy Ironwood Pharmaceuticals/Forest Pharmaceuticals), a new, first- Division of Gastroenterology and in-class medication for the treatment of chronic constipation Hepatology, Area 4C and constipation-predominant IBS. Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center 1 Medical Center Drive Lebanon, NH 03756; Tel: 603-650-5215; Fax: 603-650-5225; onstipation is
    [Show full text]
  • Laxatives for the Management of Constipation in People Receiving Palliative Care (Review)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by UCL Discovery Laxatives for the management of constipation in people receiving palliative care (Review) Candy B, Jones L, Larkin PJ, Vickerstaff V, Tookman A, Stone P This is a reprint of a Cochrane review, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration and published in The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 5 http://www.thecochranelibrary.com Laxatives for the management of constipation in people receiving palliative care (Review) Copyright © 2015 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. TABLE OF CONTENTS HEADER....................................... 1 ABSTRACT ...................................... 1 PLAINLANGUAGESUMMARY . 2 BACKGROUND .................................... 2 OBJECTIVES ..................................... 4 METHODS ...................................... 4 RESULTS....................................... 7 Figure1. ..................................... 8 Figure2. ..................................... 9 Figure3. ..................................... 10 DISCUSSION ..................................... 13 AUTHORS’CONCLUSIONS . 14 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . 14 REFERENCES ..................................... 15 CHARACTERISTICSOFSTUDIES . 17 DATAANDANALYSES. 26 ADDITIONALTABLES. 26 APPENDICES ..................................... 28 WHAT’SNEW..................................... 35 HISTORY....................................... 35 CONTRIBUTIONSOFAUTHORS . 36 DECLARATIONSOFINTEREST . 36 SOURCESOFSUPPORT . 36 DIFFERENCES
    [Show full text]
  • Chronic Constipation: Update on Management
    REVIEW CME LEARNING OBJECTIVE: Readers will differentiate the types of chronic constipation and apply traditional CREDIT and newer treatments to best advantage UMAR HAYAT, MD MOHANNAD DUGUM, MD SAMITA GARG, MD Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatol- Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of ogy, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic; Pittsburgh, PA Assistant Professor, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH Chronic constipation: Update on management ABSTRACT hronic constipation has a variety of pos- C sible causes and mechanisms. Although Managing chronic constipation involves identifying and traditional conservative treatments are still treating secondary causes, instituting lifestyle changes, valid and first-line, if these fail, clinicians can prescribing pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic thera- choose from a growing list of new treatments, pies, and, occasionally, referring for surgery. Several new tailored to the cause in the individual patient. drugs have been approved, and others are in the pipeline. This article discusses how defecation works (or doesn’t), the types of chronic constipation, KEY POINTS the available diagnostic tools, and traditional Although newer drugs are available, lifestyle modifica- and newer treatments, including some still in tions and laxatives continue to be the treatments of development. choice for chronic constipation, as they have high re- ■ THE EPIDEMIOLOGY OF CONSTIPATION sponse rates and few adverse effects and are relatively affordable. Chronic constipation is one of the most com- mon gastrointestinal disorders, affecting about 15% of all adults and 30% of those over the Chronic constipation requires different management age of 60.1 It can be a primary disorder or sec- approaches depending on whether colonic transit time ondary to other factors.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.2.2 Misuse of Stimulant Laxatives
    Medicines Adverse Reactions Committee Meeting date 10/06/2021 Agenda item 3.2.2 Title Misuse of stimulant laxatives Submitted by Medsafe Pharmacovigilance Paper type For advice Team Active ingredient Product name Sponsor Bisacodyl Bisacodyl Laxative (Pharmacy Health) PSM Healthcare Limited trading as API tablet Consumer Brands Dulcolax tablet Sanofi-Aventis New Zealand Limited Dulcolax Suppository Sanofi-Aventis New Zealand Limited *Lax-Suppositories Bisacodyl AFT Pharmaceuticals Limited *Lax-Tab tablet AFT Pharmaceuticals Limited Docusate sodium *Coloxyl tablet Pharmacy Retailing (New Zealand) Limited trading as Healthcare Logistics Docusate sodium + Coloxyl with Senna tablet Pharmacy Retailing (New Zealand) sennosides Limited trading as Healthcare Logistics *Laxsol tablet Pharmacy Retailing (New Zealand) Limited trading as Healthcare Logistics Glycerol *Glycerol Suppositories PSM Healthcare Limited trading as API Consumer Brands Sennosides *Senokot tablet Reckitt Benckiser (New Zealand) Limited Sodium picosulfate Dulcolax SP Drops oral solution Sanofi-Aventis New Zealand Limited PHARMAC funding *Pharmaceutical Schedule Lax-Tab tablets, Lax-Suppositories Bisacodyl, Coloxyl tablets and Glycerol Suppositories are fully-funded only on a prescription. Senokot tablets are part- funded. Previous MARC Misuse of stimulant laxatives has not been discussed previously. meetings International action Following a national safety review published in August 2020, the MHRA in the UK has introduced pack size restrictions, revised recommended ages for use
    [Show full text]
  • 1: Gastro-Intestinal System
    1 1: GASTRO-INTESTINAL SYSTEM Antacids .......................................................... 1 Stimulant laxatives ...................................46 Compound alginate products .................. 3 Docuate sodium .......................................49 Simeticone ................................................... 4 Lactulose ....................................................50 Antimuscarinics .......................................... 5 Macrogols (polyethylene glycols) ..........51 Glycopyrronium .......................................13 Magnesium salts ........................................53 Hyoscine butylbromide ...........................16 Rectal products for constipation ..........55 Hyoscine hydrobromide .........................19 Products for haemorrhoids .................56 Propantheline ............................................21 Pancreatin ...................................................58 Orphenadrine ...........................................23 Prokinetics ..................................................24 Quick Clinical Guides: H2-receptor antagonists .......................27 Death rattle (noisy rattling breathing) 12 Proton pump inhibitors ........................30 Opioid-induced constipation .................42 Loperamide ................................................35 Bowel management in paraplegia Laxatives ......................................................38 and tetraplegia .....................................44 Ispaghula (Psyllium husk) ........................45 ANTACIDS Indications:
    [Show full text]
  • Chronic Constipation: an Evidence-Based Review
    J Am Board Fam Med: first published as 10.3122/jabfm.2011.04.100272 on 7 July 2011. Downloaded from CLINICAL REVIEW Chronic Constipation: An Evidence-Based Review Lawrence Leung, MBBChir, FRACGP, FRCGP, Taylor Riutta, MD, Jyoti Kotecha, MPA, MRSC, and Walter Rosser MD, MRCGP, FCFP Background: Chronic constipation is a common condition seen in family practice among the elderly and women. There is no consensus regarding its exact definition, and it may be interpreted differently by physicians and patients. Physicians prescribe various treatments, and patients often adopt different over-the-counter remedies. Chronic constipation is either caused by slow colonic transit or pelvic floor dysfunction, and treatment differs accordingly. Methods: To update our knowledge of chronic constipation and its etiology and best-evidence treat- ment, information was synthesized from articles published in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Levels of evidence and recommendations were made according to the Strength of Recommendation taxonomy. Results: The standard advice of increasing dietary fibers, fluids, and exercise for relieving chronic constipation will only benefit patients with true deficiency. Biofeedback works best for constipation caused by pelvic floor dysfunction. Pharmacological agents increase bulk or water content in the bowel lumen or aim to stimulate bowel movements. Novel classes of compounds have emerged for treating chronic constipation, with promising clinical trial data. Finally, the link between senna abuse and colon cancer remains unsupported. Conclusions: Chronic constipation should be managed according to its etiology and guided by the best evidence-based treatment.(J Am Board Fam Med 2011;24:436–451.) copyright. Keywords: Chronic Constipation, Clinical Review, Evidence-Based Medicine, Family Medicine, Gastrointestinal Problems, Systematic Review The word “constipation” has varied meanings for was established in 1991 by Drossman et al, primar- different individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • Relative Efficacy of Tegaserod in a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Licensed Therapies for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation
    This is a repository copy of Relative Efficacy of Tegaserod in a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Licensed Therapies for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation.. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/149160/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Black, CJ, Burr, NE orcid.org/0000-0003-1988-2982 and Ford, AC orcid.org/0000-0001-6371-4359 (2020) Relative Efficacy of Tegaserod in a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Licensed Therapies for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 18 (5). 1238-1239.E1. ISSN 1542-3565 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.07.007 © 2019 by the AGA Institute. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Black et al. Page 1 of 9 Accepted for publication 3rd July 2019 TITLE PAGE Title: Relative Efficacy of Tegaserod in a Systematic Review and Network Meta- analysis of Licensed Therapies for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation.
    [Show full text]
  • Oral Lactulose Vs. Polyethylene Glycol for Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopy: a Randomized Controlled Study
    Open Access Original Article DOI: 10.7759/cureus.14363 Oral Lactulose vs. Polyethylene Glycol for Bowel Preparation in Colonoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Study Jagdeep Jagdeep 1 , Gaurish Sawant 1 , Pawan Lal 1 , Lovenish Bains 1 1. Department of Surgery, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, IND Corresponding author: Lovenish Bains, [email protected] Abstract Background Colonoscopy is the method of choice to evaluate colonic mucosa and the distal ileum, allowing the diagnosis and treatment of many diseases. Appropriate bowel preparation necessitates the use of laxative medications, preferentially by oral administration. These include polyethylene glycol (PEG), sodium picosulfate, and sodium phosphate (NaP). Lactulose, a semi-synthetic derivative of lactose, undergoes fermentation, acidifying the gut environment, stimulates intestinal motility, and increases osmotic pressure within the lumen of the colon. Methods In this prospective randomized controlled study, we analyzed 40 patients who presented with symptomatic bleeding per rectum and underwent bowel preparation either with lactulose or polyethylene glycol for colonoscopy. The quality of bowel preparation and other variables like palatability, discomfort, and electrolyte levels were analyzed. Results The majority of the patients (90%) were comfortable with the taste of lactulose solution, whereas the PEG group patients (55%) were equally divided on its palatability. On lactulose consumption, 40% of patients reported nausea/vomiting and around 10% of patients complained of abdominal discomfort. Serum sodium levels showed insignificant changes from 4.33 ± 0.07 mEq/L to 4.21 ± 0.18 mEq/L while potassium also remained similar from 4.26 ± 0.03 mEq/L to 4.22 ± 0.17 mEq/L. The mean Boston Bowel Preparation Score (BBPS) in patients who received lactulose solution was 6.25 ± 0.786 and in those who received PEG solution, it was 6.35 ± 0.813 (P-value = 0.59).
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy and Safety of Intestinal Secretagogues for Chronic Constipation: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    AG-2017-127 AHEADORIGINAL OF ARTICLEPRINT dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-2803.201800000-41 Efficacy and safety of intestinal secretagogues for chronic constipation: a systematic review and meta-analysis Juan Sebastian LASA, María Josefina ALTAMIRANO, Luis Florez BRACHO, Silvina PAZ and Ignacio ZUBIAURRE Received 23/12/2017 Accepted 19/2/2018 ABSTRACT – Background – Intestinal secretagogues have been tested for the treatment of chronic constipation and constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome. The class-effect of these type of drugs has not been studied. Objective – To determine the efficacy and safety of intestinal secretagogues for the treatment of chronic constipation and constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome. Methods – A computer-based search of papers from 1966 to September 2017 was performed. Search strategy consisted of the following MESH terms: intestinal secretagogues OR linaclotide OR lubiprostone OR plecanatide OR tenapanor OR chloride channel AND chronic constipation OR irritable bowel syndrome. Data were extracted as intention-to-treat analyses. A random-effects model was used to give a more conservative estimate of the effect of individual therapies, allowing for any heterogeneity among studies. Outcome measures were described as Relative Risk of achieving an improvement in the symptom under consideration. Results – Database Search yielded 520 bibliographic citations: 16 trials were included for analysis, which enrolled 7658 patients. Twelve trials assessed the efficacy of intestinal secretagogues for chronic constipation. These were better than placebo at achieving an increase in the number of complete spontaneous bowel movements per week [RR 1.87 (1.24-2.83)], at achieving three or more spontaneous bowel movements per week [RR 1.56 (1.31- 1.85)] and at inducing spontaneous bowel movement after medication intake [RR 1.49 (1.07-2.06)].
    [Show full text]
  • Estonian Statistics on Medicines 2016 1/41
    Estonian Statistics on Medicines 2016 ATC code ATC group / Active substance (rout of admin.) Quantity sold Unit DDD Unit DDD/1000/ day A ALIMENTARY TRACT AND METABOLISM 167,8985 A01 STOMATOLOGICAL PREPARATIONS 0,0738 A01A STOMATOLOGICAL PREPARATIONS 0,0738 A01AB Antiinfectives and antiseptics for local oral treatment 0,0738 A01AB09 Miconazole (O) 7088 g 0,2 g 0,0738 A01AB12 Hexetidine (O) 1951200 ml A01AB81 Neomycin+ Benzocaine (dental) 30200 pieces A01AB82 Demeclocycline+ Triamcinolone (dental) 680 g A01AC Corticosteroids for local oral treatment A01AC81 Dexamethasone+ Thymol (dental) 3094 ml A01AD Other agents for local oral treatment A01AD80 Lidocaine+ Cetylpyridinium chloride (gingival) 227150 g A01AD81 Lidocaine+ Cetrimide (O) 30900 g A01AD82 Choline salicylate (O) 864720 pieces A01AD83 Lidocaine+ Chamomille extract (O) 370080 g A01AD90 Lidocaine+ Paraformaldehyde (dental) 405 g A02 DRUGS FOR ACID RELATED DISORDERS 47,1312 A02A ANTACIDS 1,0133 Combinations and complexes of aluminium, calcium and A02AD 1,0133 magnesium compounds A02AD81 Aluminium hydroxide+ Magnesium hydroxide (O) 811120 pieces 10 pieces 0,1689 A02AD81 Aluminium hydroxide+ Magnesium hydroxide (O) 3101974 ml 50 ml 0,1292 A02AD83 Calcium carbonate+ Magnesium carbonate (O) 3434232 pieces 10 pieces 0,7152 DRUGS FOR PEPTIC ULCER AND GASTRO- A02B 46,1179 OESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE (GORD) A02BA H2-receptor antagonists 2,3855 A02BA02 Ranitidine (O) 340327,5 g 0,3 g 2,3624 A02BA02 Ranitidine (P) 3318,25 g 0,3 g 0,0230 A02BC Proton pump inhibitors 43,7324 A02BC01 Omeprazole
    [Show full text]