Erythromycin for prokinesis: imprudent prescribing?

Erythromycin versus metoclopramide for post-pyloric spiral nasoenteric tube placement: a randomized non-inferiority trial

Purpose

To determine whether erythromycin is non-inferior to metoclopramide in facilitating post-pyloric placement of self-propelled spiral nasoenteric tubes (NETs) in critically ill patients.

Methods

A prospective, multicenter, open-label, parallel, and non-inferiority randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing erythromycin with metoclopramide in facilitating post-pyloric placement of spiral NETs in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) of eight tertiary hospitals in China. The primary outcome was procedure success defined as post-pyloric placement (spiral NETs reached the first portion of the duodenum or beyond confirmed by abdominal radiography 24 h after tube insertion).

Results

A total of 5688 patients were admitted to the ICUs. Of these, in 355 patients there was a plan to insert a nasoenteric feeding tube, of whom 332 were randomized, with 167 patients assigned to the erythromycin group and 165 patients assigned to the metoclopramide group. The success rate of post-pyloric placement was 57.5% (96/167) in the erythromycin group, as compared with 50.3% (83/165) in the metoclopramide group (a difference of 7.2%, 95% CI − 3.5% to 17.9%), in the intention-to-treat analysis, not including the prespecified margin of − 10% for non-inferiority. The success rates of post-D1 (reaching the second portion of the duodenum or beyond), post-D2 (reaching the third portion of the duodenum or beyond), post-D3 (reaching the fourth portion of the duodenum or beyond), and proximal jejunum placement and the incidence of any adverse events were not significantly different between the groups.

Conclusions

Erythromycin is non-inferior to metoclopramide in facilitating post-pyloric placement of spiral NETs in critically ill patients. The success rates of post-D1, post-D2, post-D3, and proximal jejunum placement were not significantly different.

Non-anti-infective effects of antimicrobials and their clinical applications: a review

Antimicrobial agents are undoubtedly one of the key advances in the history of modern medicine and infectious diseases, improving the clinical outcomes of infection owing to their inhibitory effects on microbial growth. However, many antimicrobial agents also have biological activities stemming from their interactions with host receptors and effects on host inflammatory responses and other human or bacterial cellular biological pathways. These result in clinical uses of antimicrobial drugs that are distinct from their direct bacteriostatic or bactericidal properties. We reviewed the published literature regarding non-anti-infective therapeutic properties and proposed clinical applications of selected antimicrobials, specifically, macrolides, tetracyclines, sulfonamides, and ketoconazole. The clinical applications reviewed were varied, and we focused on uses that were clinically relevant (in terms of importance and burden of disease) and where published evidence exists. Such uses include chronic inflammatory pulmonary and skin disorders, chronic periodontitis, gastrointestinal dysmotility, rheumatoid arthritis, and cancer. Most of these potential therapeutic uses are not Food and Drug Administration approved. Clinicians need to weigh the use of antimicrobial agents for their non-anti-infective benefits, considering potential adverse effects and long-term effect on microbial resistance.

[Promotility drugs use in critical care: indications and limits?]

Enteral feeding is often limited by gastric and intestinal motility disturbances in critically ill patients, particularly in patients with shock. So, promotility agents are frequently used to improve tolerance to enteral nutrition. This review summaries the pathophysiology, presents the available pharmacological strategies, the clinical data, the counter-indications and the principal limits. The clinical data are poor. No study demonstrates a positive effect on clinical outcomes. Metoclopramide and erythromycin seems to be the more effective. Considering the risk of antibiotic resistance, the first line use of erythromycin should be avoided in favor of metoclopramide.

[Enteral feeding of critical patients]

Artificial nutrition support forms part of the basic care of critical patients. Enteral feeding has been shown to be better than total parenteral nutrition at improving morbidity (infectious complications) and reducing the length of hospital stays, number of days with mechanical ventilation, and costs. As with any other treatment, enteral feeding has associated complications and side effects which should be understood and treated in order to obtain the greatest benefit from it and reduce possible adverse effects. In this review, we attempt to provide a practical summary of the use of enteral feeding in critical patients. We cover the management of the most frequent associated complications, based on new studies and current scientific evidence. The review is intended to serve as a practice guide for the routine care of severely ill patients.

Prokinetic Drugs in the Intensive Care Unit: Reviewing the Evidence

Delay in gastric emptying is common in the critically ill, and can lead to abdominal distension, diarrhoea or constipation, and vomiting, and may contribute to increased incidence of reflux and nosocomial infection. Prokinetic agents increase the rate of luminal transit as well as the force of contraction, and are commonly used in the intensive care unit. This article summarises the current state of knowledge about the use of prokinetics and explores potential agents which might be used in the future in this group of patients.

Current Role of Emergency US in Patients with Major Trauma

In patients with major trauma, focused abdominal ultrasonography (US) often is the initial imaging examination. US is readily available, requires minimal preparation time, and may be performed with mobile equipment that allows greater flexibility in patient positioning than is possible with other modalities. It also is effective in depicting abnormally large intraperitoneal collections of free fluid, which are indirect evidence of a solid organ injury that requires immediate surgery. However, because US has poor sensitivity for the detection of most solid organ injuries, an initial survey with US often is followed by a more thorough examination with multidetector computed tomography (CT). The initial US examination is generally performed with a FAST (focused assessment with sonography in trauma) protocol. Speed is important because if intraabdominal bleeding is present, the probability of death increases by about 1% for every 3 minutes that elapses before intervention. Typical sites of fluid accumulation in the presence of a solid organ injury are the Morison pouch (liver laceration), the pouch of Douglas (intraperitoneal rupture of the urinary bladder), and the splenorenal fossa (splenic and renal injuries). FAST may be used also to exclude injuries to the heart and pericardium but not those to the bowel, mesentery, and urinary bladder, a purpose for which multidetector CT is better suited. If there is time after the initial FAST survey, the US examination may be extended to extra-abdominal regions to rule out pneumothorax or to guide endotracheal intubation, vascular puncture, or other interventional procedures.

Risk of Clostridium difficile diarrhoea in critically ill patients treated with erythromycin-based prokinetic therapy for feed intolerance

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of Clostridium difficile (CD) diarrhoea in feed-intolerant, critically ill patients who received erythromycin-based prokinetic therapy.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective observational study in a mixed intensive care unit.

METHODS

The development of diarrhoea (> 3 loose, liquid stool per day with an estimated total volume > or = 250ml/day) was assessed in 180 consecutive critically ill patients who received prokinetic therapy (erythromycin only, n = 53; metoclopramide, n 37; combination erythromycin/metoclopramide, n = 90) for feed intolerance. Stool microscopy, culture and CD toxin assay were performed in all patients who developed diarrhoea during and after prokinetic therapy. Diarrhoea was deemed to be related to CD infection if CD toxin was detected.

RESULTS

Demographics, antibiotic use and admission diagnosis were similar amongst the three patients groups. Diarrhoea developed in 72 (40%) patients, 9.9 +/- 0.8 days after commencement of therapy, none of whom was positive for CD toxin or bacterial infection. Parasitic infections were found in four aboriginal men from an area endemic for these infections. Diarrhoea was most prevalent in patients who received combination therapy (49%) and was more common than in those who received erythromycin alone (30%) and metoclopramide alone (32%). Diarrhoea was short-lasting with a mean duration of 3.6 +/- 1.2 days.

CONCLUSIONS

In critical illness, diarrhoea following the administration of erythromycin at prokinetic doses is not associated with CD but may be related to pro-motility effects of the agent. Prokinetic therapy should be stopped at the onset of diarrhoea and prophylactic use should be strictly avoided.

Risk of Clostridium difficile diarrhoea in critically ill patients treated with erythromycin-based prokinetic therapy for feed intolerance

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of Clostridium difficile (CD) diarrhoea in feed-intolerant, critically ill patients who received erythromycin-based prokinetic therapy.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective observational study in a mixed intensive care unit.

METHODS

The development of diarrhoea (> 3 loose, liquid stool per day with an estimated total volume > or = 250ml/day) was assessed in 180 consecutive critically ill patients who received prokinetic therapy (erythromycin only, n = 53; metoclopramide, n 37; combination erythromycin/metoclopramide, n = 90) for feed intolerance. Stool microscopy, culture and CD toxin assay were performed in all patients who developed diarrhoea during and after prokinetic therapy. Diarrhoea was deemed to be related to CD infection if CD toxin was detected.

RESULTS

Demographics, antibiotic use and admission diagnosis were similar amongst the three patients groups. Diarrhoea developed in 72 (40%) patients, 9.9 +/- 0.8 days after commencement of therapy, none of whom was positive for CD toxin or bacterial infection. Parasitic infections were found in four aboriginal men from an area endemic for these infections. Diarrhoea was most prevalent in patients who received combination therapy (49%) and was more common than in those who received erythromycin alone (30%) and metoclopramide alone (32%). Diarrhoea was short-lasting with a mean duration of 3.6 +/- 1.2 days.

CONCLUSIONS

In critical illness, diarrhoea following the administration of erythromycin at prokinetic doses is not associated with CD but may be related to pro-motility effects of the agent. Prokinetic therapy should be stopped at the onset of diarrhoea and prophylactic use should be strictly avoided.

The use of erythromycin as a gastrointestinal prokinetic agent in adult critical care: benefits versus risks

Erythromycin A, the first macrolide, was introduced in the 1950s and after years of clinical experience it still remains a commonly relied upon antibiotic. In the past, pharmacodynamic characteristics of macrolides beyond antimicrobial action such as anti-inflammatory and immune-modulating properties have been of scientific and clinical interest. The function of erythromycin as a prokinetic agent has also been investigated for a range of gastrointestinal motility disorders and more recently within the context of critically ill patients. Prokinetic agents are drugs that increase contractile force and accelerate intraluminal transit. Whilst the anti-inflammatory action may be a desirable side effect to its antibiotic action, using erythromycin A merely for its prokinetic effect alone raises the concern about promoting emergence of macrolide resistance. The objectives of this review article are: (i) to briefly summarize the modes and epidemiology of macrolide resistance, particularly in respect to that found in the Streptococcus species (a potential reservoir for the dissemination of macrolide resistance on the critical care unit); (ii) to discuss in this context the evidence for conditions promoting bacterial resistance against macrolides; and (iii) to assess the potential clinical benefit of using erythromycin A as a prokinetic versus the risks of promoting emergence of macrolide resistance in the clinical setting. We conclude, that in view of the growing weight of evidence demonstrating the potential epidemiological impact of the increased use of macrolides upon the spread of resistance, versus a lack of sufficient and convincing evidence that erythromycin A is a superior prokinetic agent to potential alternatives in the critically ill patient population, at this stage we do not advocate the use of erythromycin A as a prokinetic agent in critically ill patients unless they have failed all other treatment for impaired gastrointestinal dysmotility and are intolerant of metoclopramide. Further large and methodologically robust studies are needed to ascertain the effectiveness of erythromycin A and other alternative agents in the critically ill.