Risk of extrapyramidal side effects comparing continuous vs. bolus intravenous metoclopramide administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Pharmacological and nutritional therapy of children and adults with chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction

INTRODUCTION

Chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction (CIPO) is a rare, heterogeneous and severe form of gastrointestinal dysmotility.

AREAS COVERED

Pertinent literature on pediatric and adult CIPO management has been assessed via PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE from inception to June 2022. Prokinetics, aimed at restoring intestinal propulsion (e.g. orthopramides and substituted benzamides, acetyl cholinesterase inhibitors, serotonergic agents and others), have been poorly tested and the available data showed only partial efficacy. Moreover, some prokinetic agents (e.g. orthopramides and substituted benzamides) can cause major side effects. The CIPO-related small intestinal bacterial overgrowth requires treatment preferably via poorly absorbable antibiotics to avoid bacterial resistance. Apart from opioids, which worsen gut motility, analgesics should be considered to manage visceral pain, which might dominate the clinical manifestations. Nutritional support, via modified oral feeding, enteral or parenteral nutrition, is key to halt CIPO-related malnutrition.

EXPERT OPINION

There have been significant roadblocks preventing the development of CIPO treatment. Nonetheless, the considerable advancement in neurogastroenterology and pharmacological agents cast hopes to test the actual efficacy of new prokinetics via well-designed clinical trials. Adequate dietary strategies and supplementation remain of crucial importance. Taken together, novel pharmacological and nutritional options are expected to provide adequate treatments for these patients.

Self-assumed Neurologic Related Condition Deviated Metoclopramide-Induced Acute Dystonic of Oculogyric Crisis in a Woman of Childbearing Age: A Case Report

A 26-year-old Malaysian woman (childbearing age) attended a private primary care clinic with a known case of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and complained of persistent nausea and a few episodes of vomiting. She had no known drug allergy, no surgical history, no hospitalization in the last two years, was a non-smoker, and no history of drug or alcohol abuse. The patient was prescribed Tab metoclopramide 10 mg TDS and Tab ranitidine 150 mg BD for five days. About 30 min after oral administration of both medicines, her eyes rolled involuntary upward, leading to lateral deviation of the eyes, and mouth jaws clenched as if “dislocated jaws.” The patient was immediately brought into an emergency department (ED) of a public tertiary care hospital. A drug challenge test was done which resulted in the withdrawal of metoclopramide. The accompanied sister later disclosed that the patient had taken metoclopramide and ranitidine from a private clinic earlier in the day. The patient self-assumed to have a sudden seizure, due to excessive hot weather and dehydration. A slow intravenous infusion of 50 mg/mL diphenhydramine hydrochloride in 0.9% w/v NaCl 100 mL was administered stat. Consequently, the symptoms vanished after approximately 30 min of the therapy, devoid of relapse. The patient was discharged from ED post 8 hours of monitoring with complete recovery. Physicians frequently prescribe metoclopramide to treat nausea and vomiting, which may cause adverse drug reaction of acute dystonic oculogyric crisis (OGC). Due to its unwanted and unpredictable extrapyramidal symptoms, metoclopramide should be prescribed and dispensed with caution. Thorough history taking at ED is imperative for correct early diagnosis and treatment, as metoclopramide-induced dystonic OGC has a high probability of confusion with other causes of dystonia such as conversion and seizures, encephalitis, tetanus, and hypercalcemic tetany.

Trends in the Management of Headache Disorders in US Emergency Departments: Analysis of 2007-2018 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey Data

We examined trends in management of headache disorders in United States (US) emergency department (ED) visits. We conducted a cross-sectional study using 2007−2018 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data. We included adult patient visits (≥18 years) with a primary ED discharge diagnosis of headache. We classified headache medications by pharmacological group: opioids, butalbital, ergot alkaloids/triptans, acetaminophen/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antiemetics, diphenhydramine, corticosteroids, and intravenous fluids. To obtain reliable estimates, we aggregated data into three time periods: 2007−2010, 2011−2014, and 2015−2018. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined medication, neuroimaging, and outpatient referral trends, separately. Among headache-related ED visits, opioid use decreased from 54.1% in 2007−2010 to 28.3% in 2015−2018 (Ptrend < 0.001). There were statistically significant increasing trends in acetaminophen/NSAIDs, diphenhydramine, and corticosteroids use (all Ptrend < 0.001). Changes in butalbital (6.4%), ergot alkaloid/triptan (4.7%), antiemetic (59.2% in 2015−2018), and neuroimaging (37.3%) use over time were insignificant. Headache-related ED visits with outpatient referral for follow-up increased slightly from 73.3% in 2007−2010 to 79.7% in 2015−2018 (Ptrend = 0.02). Reflecting evidence-based guideline recommendations for headache management, opioid use substantially decreased from 2007 to 2018 among US headache-related ED visits. Future studies are warranted to identify strategies to promote evidence-based treatment for headaches (e.g., sumatriptan, dexamethasone) and appropriate outpatient referral and reduce unnecessary neuroimaging orders in EDs.

United European Gastroenterology (UEG) and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) consensus on gastroparesis

BACKGROUND

Gastroparesis is a condition characterized by epigastric symptoms and delayed gastric emptying (GE) rate in the absence of any mechanical obstruction. The condition is challenging in clinical practice by the lack of guidance concerning diagnosis and management of gastroparesis.

METHODS

A Delphi consensus was undertaken by 40 experts from 19 European countries who conducted a literature summary and voting process on 89 statements. Quality of evidence was evaluated using grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation criteria. Consensus (defined as ≥80% agreement) was reached for 25 statements.

RESULTS

The European consensus defined gastroparesis as the presence of symptoms associated with delayed GE in the absence of mechanical obstruction. Nausea and vomiting were identified as cardinal symptoms, with often coexisting postprandial distress syndrome symptoms of dyspepsia. The true epidemiology of gastroparesis is not known in detail, but diabetes, gastric surgery, certain neurological and connective tissue diseases, and the use of certain drugs recognized as risk factors. While the panel agreed that severely impaired gastric motor function is present in these patients, there was no consensus on underlying pathophysiology. The panel agreed that an upper endoscopy and a GE test are required for diagnosis. Only dietary therapy, dopamine-2 antagonists and 5-HT₄ receptor agonists were considered appropriate therapies, in addition to nutritional support in case of severe weight loss. No consensus was reached on the use of proton pump inhibitors, other classes of antiemetics or prokinetics, neuromodulators, complimentary, psychological, or more invasive therapies. Finally, there was consensus that gastroparesis adversely impacts on quality of life and healthcare costs and that the long-term prognosis of gastroparesis depends on the cause.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

A multinational group of European experts summarized the current state of consensus on definition, symptom characteristics, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of gastroparesis.

United European Gastroenterology (UEG) and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) consensus on gastroparesis

Background

Gastroparesis is a condition characterized by epigastric symptoms and delayed gastric emptying (GE) rate in the absence of any mechanical obstruction. The condition is challenging in clinical practice by the lack of guidance concerning diagnosis and management of gastroparesis.

Methods

A Delphi consensus was undertaken by 40 experts from 19 European countries who conducted a literature summary and voting process on 89 statements. Quality of evidence was evaluated using grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation criteria. Consensus (defined as ≥80% agreement) was reached for 25 statements.

Results

The European consensus defined gastroparesis as the presence of symptoms associated with delayed GE in the absence of mechanical obstruction. Nausea and vomiting were identified as cardinal symptoms, with often coexisting postprandial distress syndrome symptoms of dyspepsia. The true epidemiology of gastroparesis is not known in detail, but diabetes, gastric surgery, certain neurological and connective tissue diseases, and the use of certain drugs recognized as risk factors. While the panel agreed that severely impaired gastric motor function is present in these patients, there was no consensus on underlying pathophysiology. The panel agreed that an upper endoscopy and a GE test are required for diagnosis. Only dietary therapy, dopamine‐2 antagonists and 5‐HT₄ receptor agonists were considered appropriate therapies, in addition to nutritional support in case of severe weight loss. No consensus was reached on the use of proton pump inhibitors, other classes of antiemetics or prokinetics, neuromodulators, complimentary, psychological, or more invasive therapies. Finally, there was consensus that gastroparesis adversely impacts on quality of life and healthcare costs and that the long‐term prognosis of gastroparesis depends on the cause.

Conclusions and Inferences

A multinational group of European experts summarized the current state of consensus on definition, symptom characteristics, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of gastroparesis.

Current knowledge

The epidemiology of gastroparesis is not well known.

Diagnosis and treatment of gastroparesis is challenging due to uncertainties in definition and optimal therapeutic approach.

What is new here

A Delphi panel consisting of 40 experts from 19 European countries established the level of consensus on 89 statements regarding gastroparesis.

The statements reaching consensus serve to guide clinicians in recognizing, diagnosing and treating gastroparesis in clinical practice.

The statements without consensus identify areas in need of future research.

Novel Anticancer Fused Pyrazole Derivatives as EGFR and VEGFR-2 Dual TK Inhibitors

EGFR and VEGFR-2 represent promising targets for cancer treatment as they are very important in tumor development as well as in angiogenesis and metastasis. In this work, 6-amino-4-(2-bromophenyl)-3-methyl-1,4-dihydropyrano[2,3-c]pyrazole-5-carbonitrile 1 and (E)-4-(2-Bromobenzylidene)-5-methyl-2,4-dihydro-3H-pyrazol-3-one 11 were selected as starting materials to synthesize different fused pyrazole derivatives; dihydropyrano[2,3-c]pyrazole 1, 2, 7–9, and 15, pyrazolo[4′,3′:5,6]pyrano[2,3-d]pyrimidine 3–6, pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidine 12 and 13, and pyrazolo[3,4-c]pyrazole 14 derivatives were synthesized to evaluate their anticancer activity against HEPG2 human cancer cell lines compared to erlotinib and sorafenib as reference drugs. Seven compounds 1, 2, 4, 8, 11, 12, and 15 showed nearly 10 fold higher activity than erlotinib (10.6 μM) with IC₅₀ ranging from 0.31 to 0.71 μM. In vitro EGFR and VEGFR-2 inhibitory activity were performed for the synthesized compounds, and the results identified compound 3 as the most potent EGFR inhibitor (IC₅₀ = 0.06 μM) and compound 9 as the most potent VEGFR-2 inhibitor (IC₅₀ = 0.22 μM). Moreover, compounds 9 and 12 revealed potent dual EGFR and VEGFR-2 inhibition, and these results were supported by docking studies of these two compounds within the active sites of both enzymes.

Effects of prophylactic anticholinergic medications to decrease extrapyramidal side effects in patients taking acute antiemetic drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of prophylactic anticholinergic medications in reducing extrapyramidal symptoms in patients taking acute antiemetics with a dopamine D2 receptor antagonist effect.

METHODS

Systematic searches of all published studies through March 2017 were identified from PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus. Only randomised controlled trials of patients receiving dopamine D2 antagonist antiemetic therapy for acute migraine in which an anticholinergic or placebo was compared were included. Pooled ORs were calculated for incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms and sedation.

RESULTS

Four placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials consisting of 737 patients met the inclusion criteria for our meta-analysis. The effect of diphenhydramine differed depending on the method of administration of the antiemetic. When the antiemetic was delivered as a 2 min antiemetic bolus, the odds of extrapyramidal symptoms were significantly reduced in the diphenhydramine group compared with placebo (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.81; P=0.01). However, when the antiemetic was given as a 15 min infusion, there was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms with or without diphenhydramine (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.91; P=0.85). The lowest incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms was observed in patients receiving a 15 min antiemetic infusion without diphenhydramine prophylaxis (9.8%). In two trials including 351 patients that dichotomously reported sedation scales, diphenhydramine had significantly higher rates of sedation (31.6%vs19.2%, OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.33; P=0.007).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic diphenhydramine reduces extrapyramidal symptoms in patients receiving bolus antiemetic therapy with a dopamine D2 antagonist effect, but not when it is given as an infusion. Because of significantly greater sedation with diphenhydramine, the most effective strategy is to administer the D2 antagonist antiemetic as a 15 min infusion without prophylaxis.

The Safety of Metoclopramide in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Metoclopramide is recommended for adults with breakthrough or refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and for CINV prophylaxis in children. The drug regulatory agencies of Canada and the EU have revised the labelling of metoclopramide to contraindicate its use in children aged <1 year and to caution against its use in children aged <5 years and its duration of use beyond 5 days.

OBJECTIVE

This review describes the safety of metoclopramide in children when given for any indication.

METHODS

We conducted electronic searches in MEDLINE and Embase as of 9 March 2015. All studies in English reporting adverse effects associated with the use of metoclopramide in children (aged ≤18 years) were included. Adverse effects that had a cumulative incidence of at least 1 % and were reported in prospective studies were synthesized.

RESULTS

A total of 108 (57 prospective) studies involving 2699 patients (2745 metoclopramide courses) were included. The most common adverse effects reported in prospective studies of metoclopramide in children were extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS; 9 %, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 5-17), diarrhea (6 %, 95 % CI 4-9), and sedation (multiple-dose studies: 6 %, 95 % CI 3-12). Dysrhythmia, respiratory distress/arrest, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, and tardive dyskinesia were rarely associated with metoclopramide use.

LIMITATIONS

The definitions of adverse effects reported in the included studies were heterogeneous, and the risk of bias in most studies was moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

The most commonly reported adverse effects associated with the use of metoclopramide in children-EPS, diarrhea, and sedation-were reversible and of no long-term significance. Adverse effects that were life threatening or slow to resolve were rarely associated with its use in children.