-
Expert Review of Gastroenterology &... May 2023Gastroparesis is characterized by symptoms suggesting gastric retention of food and objective evidence of delayed gastric emptying in the absence of a mechanical... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Gastroparesis is characterized by symptoms suggesting gastric retention of food and objective evidence of delayed gastric emptying in the absence of a mechanical obstruction. Nausea, vomiting, early satiety, and postprandial fullness are the classic symptoms of gastroparesis. Gastroparesis is increasingly encountered by physicians. There are several recognized etiologies of gastroparesis, including diabetic, post-surgical, medication-induced, post-viral, and idiopathic.
AREAS COVERED
A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify studies discussing gastroparesis management. Dietary modifications, medication adjustments, glucose control, antiemetic agents, and prokinetic agents are all part of gastroparesis management. In this manuscript, we detail treatments evolving for gastroparesis, including nutritional, pharmaceutical, device, and recent advanced endoscopic and surgical therapies. This manuscript concludes with a speculative viewpoint on how the field will evolve in 5 years' time.
EXPERT OPINION
Identification of the dominant symptoms (fullness, nausea, abdominal pain, and heartburn) helps to direct management efforts of the patients. Treatments for refractory (treatment resistant) symptoms may include gastric electric stimulation and intra-pyloric interventions like botulinum toxin and endoscopic pyloromyotomy. Understanding the pathophysiology of gastroparesis, relating pathophysiologic abnormalities to specific symptoms, new efficacious pharmacotherapies, and better understanding of the clinical predictors of response of therapies, are priorities for future research in the field of gastroparesis.
Topics: Humans; Gastrointestinal Agents; Gastroparesis; Abdominal Pain; Nausea; Gastric Emptying
PubMed: 36970885
DOI: 10.1080/17474124.2023.2196404 -
The Medical Letter on Drugs and... Jun 2023
Topics: Humans; Migraine Disorders
PubMed: 37266987
DOI: 10.58347/tml.2023.1678a -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2021Prokinetic agents amplify and coordinate the gastrointestinal muscular contractions to facilitate the transit of intra-luminal content. Following the institution of... (Review)
Review
Prokinetic agents amplify and coordinate the gastrointestinal muscular contractions to facilitate the transit of intra-luminal content. Following the institution of dietary recommendations, prokinetics are the first medications whose goal is to improve gastric emptying and relieve symptoms of gastroparesis. The recommended use of metoclopramide, the only currently approved medication for gastroparesis in the United States, is for a duration of less than 3 months, due to the risk of reversible or irreversible extrapyramidal tremors. Domperidone, a dopamine D2 receptor antagonist, is available for prescription through the FDA's program for Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs. Macrolides are used off label and are associated with tachyphylaxis and variable duration of efficacy. Aprepitant relieves some symptoms of gastroparesis. There are newer agents in the pipeline targeting diverse gastric (fundic, antral and pyloric) motor functions, including novel serotonergic 5-HT agonists, dopaminergic D antagonists, neurokinin NK antagonists, and ghrelin agonist. Novel targets with potential to improve gastric motor functions include the pylorus, macrophage/inflammatory function, oxidative stress, and neurogenesis. In the current review, we discuss the use of pharmacological approaches with potential to enhance motor functions in the management of gastroparesis.
PubMed: 34504426
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.711500 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Dec 2021Nausea and vomiting are a common clinical symptom in the advanced cancer patient. Pharmacologic management is important. Evidence for drug choices and guidelines are...
BACKGROUND
Nausea and vomiting are a common clinical symptom in the advanced cancer patient. Pharmacologic management is important. Evidence for drug choices and guidelines are needed to help clinicians manage nausea and vomiting in this population METHODS: Evidence from a systematic review published in 2010, initial MASCC guidelines developed from a systematic review of literature to 2015, and a new systematic review of randomized trials published between 2015 and February 2, 2021, was combined to establish a new guideline.
RESULTS
A search of the literature between 2015 and February 2, 2021, revealed 257 abstracts of which there was one systematic review and 4 randomized trials which were used to modify the guideline. The new guideline is as follows: First Line: Metoclopramide (II) multiple small RCTs including a placebo-controlled trial, haloperidol (II) multiple non-placebo-controlled RCTs, high consensus. Second line: Methotrimeprazine (II) 1 well-powered non-placebo-controlled RCT, olanzapine (II) 1 placebo-controlled pilot RCT, high consensus. Third line: Tropisetron (II) large unblinded lower quality non-placebo-controlled RCT, levosulpiride (II) 1 blinded non-placebo-controlled pilot RCT, high consensus.
DISCUSSION
Haloperidol, metoclopramide, methotrimeprazine, olanzapine tropisetron, and levosulpiride have been antiemetics used in randomized trials with antiemetic activity demonstrated. There are only three placebo-controlled randomized trials we could find in our literature review. Placebo responses varied significantly between two randomized trials. More randomized placebo-controlled trials with either metoclopramide or haloperidol rescue are needed to clarify antiemetic choices in advanced cancer.
CONCLUSION
First-line antiemetics for nausea and vomiting in advanced cancer are metoclopramide and haloperidol, and second-line medications are methotrimeprazine and olanzapine.
Topics: Antiemetics; Humans; Metoclopramide; Nausea; Neoplasms; Vomiting
PubMed: 34398289
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-06437-w -
Journal of Human Lactation : Official... Nov 2020Induced lactation enables a woman who has not given birth to breastfeed a child. Lactation may be induced through both pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Induced lactation enables a woman who has not given birth to breastfeed a child. Lactation may be induced through both pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods, although the desired outcome cannot always be achieved.
RESEARCH AIMS
The aims of this scoping review was to assess the different methods used to induce lactation, as well as the factors related to sucking the breast effectively and the production of human milk.
METHODS
We searched five databases from June 2019-February 2020 for studies referring to methods and factors related to breast suckling and/or the volume of milk produced after inducing lactation, using the following search terms and Boolean operators: breastfeeding AND induced lactation AND adoptive mothers OR surrogate mothers OR female homosexuality OR non-gestating. The final review included a total of 24 articles.
RESULTS
Pharmacological methods were not always used to produce milk, although breast stimulation was essential. The age of the child, interference due to bottle feeding, breast stimulation, and the support received were important factors in the induction of lactation. There were several factors that may account for the differences between developing and higher income countries in methods of induced lactation and the amount of milk that study participants produced. There was no consensus over whether previous pregnancy and/or breastfeeding experience influenced induced lactation.
CONCLUSION
Health professionals need to have adequate knowledge about induction methods, the preferences of each woman, and the reasons for inducing lactation, to provide proper assistance. However, the lack of standardization about induction of lactation makes it difficult.
Topics: Adult; Breast Feeding; Dopamine D2 Receptor Antagonists; Female; Galactorrhea; Humans; Lactation; Metoclopramide; Pregnancy
PubMed: 32926655
DOI: 10.1177/0890334420950321 -
Dysphagia Oct 2020Dysphagia is associated with increased risk of stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP). However, it is unclear what other factors contribute to that risk or which measures may... (Review)
Review
Dysphagia is associated with increased risk of stroke-associated pneumonia (SAP). However, it is unclear what other factors contribute to that risk or which measures may reduce it. This systematic review aimed to provide evidence on interventions and care processes associated with SAP in patients with dysphagia. Studies were screened for inclusion if they included dysphagia only patients, dysphagia and non-dysphagia patients or unselected patients that included dysphagic patients and evaluated factors associated with a recorded frequency of SAP. Electronic databases were searched from inception to February 2017. Eligible studies were critically appraised. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I. The primary outcome was SAP. Eleven studies were included. Sample sizes ranged from 60 to 1088 patients. There was heterogeneity in study design. Measures of immunodepression are associated with SAP in dysphagic patients. There is insufficient evidence to justify screening for aerobic Gram-negative bacteria. Prophylactic antibiotics did not prevent SAP and proton pump inhibitors may increase risk. Treatment with metoclopramide may reduce SAP risk. Evidence that nasogastric tube (NGT) placement increases risk of SAP is equivocal. A multidisciplinary team approach and instrumental assessment of swallowing may reduce risk of pneumonia. Patients with impaired mobility were associated with increased risk. Findings should be interpreted with caution given the number of studies, heterogeneity and descriptive analyses. Several medical interventions and care processes, which may reduce risk of SAP in patients with dysphagia, have been identified. Further research is needed to evaluate the role of these interventions and care processes in clinical practice.
Topics: Deglutition; Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Pneumonia; Risk Factors; Stroke; Stroke Rehabilitation
PubMed: 31493069
DOI: 10.1007/s00455-019-10061-6