The Experts below are selected from a list of 81 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sutthiporn Pattharachayakul - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
efficacy and safety of enteral Erythromycin Estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide vs intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance a randomized double blind controlled pilot study
Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2020Co-Authors: Taniya Charoensareerat, Rungsun Bhurayanontachai, Sirima Sitaruno, Asma Navasakulpong, Apinya Boonpeng, Sanguan Lerkiatbundit, Sutthiporn PattharachayakulAbstract:Background In this pilot study, we aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of enteral Erythromycin Estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide compared to intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance. Methods This randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study included 35 mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance who were randomly assigned to receive 10-mg metoclopramide intravenously every 6-8 hours in combination with 250-mg enteral Erythromycin Estolate (study group) or placebo every 6 hours for 7 days. The primary outcome was an administered-to-target energy ratio of ≥80% at 48 hours, indicating a successful feeding. Secondary, prespecified outcomes were daily average gastric residual volume (GRV), total energy intake, administered-to-target energy ratio, hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and 28-day mortality. Results The rate of successful feeding was not significantly different between the study and placebo groups (47.1% and 61.1%, respectively; P = .51). The average daily GRV was significantly lower in the study group than in the placebo group (β = 91.58 [95% Wald CI, -164.35 to -18.8]), determined by generalized estimating equation. Other secondary outcomes were comparable, and the incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the 2 groups. One common complication was cardiac arrhythmia, which was mostly self-terminated. Conclusion Although the combination therapy of enteral Erythromycin Estolate and intravenous metoclopramide reduced GRV, the successful feeding rate and other patient-specific outcomes did not improve in mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance.
Taniya Charoensareerat - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
efficacy and safety of enteral Erythromycin Estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide vs intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance a randomized double blind controlled pilot study
Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2020Co-Authors: Taniya Charoensareerat, Rungsun Bhurayanontachai, Sirima Sitaruno, Asma Navasakulpong, Apinya Boonpeng, Sanguan Lerkiatbundit, Sutthiporn PattharachayakulAbstract:Background In this pilot study, we aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of enteral Erythromycin Estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide compared to intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance. Methods This randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study included 35 mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance who were randomly assigned to receive 10-mg metoclopramide intravenously every 6-8 hours in combination with 250-mg enteral Erythromycin Estolate (study group) or placebo every 6 hours for 7 days. The primary outcome was an administered-to-target energy ratio of ≥80% at 48 hours, indicating a successful feeding. Secondary, prespecified outcomes were daily average gastric residual volume (GRV), total energy intake, administered-to-target energy ratio, hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and 28-day mortality. Results The rate of successful feeding was not significantly different between the study and placebo groups (47.1% and 61.1%, respectively; P = .51). The average daily GRV was significantly lower in the study group than in the placebo group (β = 91.58 [95% Wald CI, -164.35 to -18.8]), determined by generalized estimating equation. Other secondary outcomes were comparable, and the incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the 2 groups. One common complication was cardiac arrhythmia, which was mostly self-terminated. Conclusion Although the combination therapy of enteral Erythromycin Estolate and intravenous metoclopramide reduced GRV, the successful feeding rate and other patient-specific outcomes did not improve in mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance.
Jorg E Hoppe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparison of Erythromycin Estolate and Erythromycin ethylsuccinate for treatment of pertussis
Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, 1992Co-Authors: Jorg E HoppeAbstract:In an open randomized multicenter study 190 culture-positive pediatric ambulatory pertussis patients were treated for 14 days with either Erythromycin Estolate (EST) (n = 93; 40 mg/kg/day divided in 2 doses) or Erythromycin ethylsuccinate (ETH) (n = 97; 60 mg/kg/day divided in 3 doses). On day 14 Bordetella pertussis was recovered from cultures of 2 patients (2.2%) treated with EST and 1 patient (1.0%) treated with ETH. Despite the fact that 151 patients (79.4%) had reached the early paroxysmal stage at initiation of antimicrobial therapy, clinical improvement was seen in the majority (reduced frequency and severity of coughing: EST, 77.4 and 67.7%; ETH, 74.2 and 63.9%, respectively). Drug-related side effects were noted in 11 patients (11.8%) treated with EST and 16 patients (16.5%) treated with ETH (P greater than 0.05) and consisted mainly of minor gastrointestinal complaints. Erythromycin Estolate in a lower dose administered only twice a day was equivalent to Erythromycin ethylsuccinate in all aspects and proved to be adequate antimicrobial treatment for pertussis patients.
Apinya Boonpeng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
efficacy and safety of enteral Erythromycin Estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide vs intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance a randomized double blind controlled pilot study
Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2020Co-Authors: Taniya Charoensareerat, Rungsun Bhurayanontachai, Sirima Sitaruno, Asma Navasakulpong, Apinya Boonpeng, Sanguan Lerkiatbundit, Sutthiporn PattharachayakulAbstract:Background In this pilot study, we aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of enteral Erythromycin Estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide compared to intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance. Methods This randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study included 35 mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance who were randomly assigned to receive 10-mg metoclopramide intravenously every 6-8 hours in combination with 250-mg enteral Erythromycin Estolate (study group) or placebo every 6 hours for 7 days. The primary outcome was an administered-to-target energy ratio of ≥80% at 48 hours, indicating a successful feeding. Secondary, prespecified outcomes were daily average gastric residual volume (GRV), total energy intake, administered-to-target energy ratio, hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and 28-day mortality. Results The rate of successful feeding was not significantly different between the study and placebo groups (47.1% and 61.1%, respectively; P = .51). The average daily GRV was significantly lower in the study group than in the placebo group (β = 91.58 [95% Wald CI, -164.35 to -18.8]), determined by generalized estimating equation. Other secondary outcomes were comparable, and the incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the 2 groups. One common complication was cardiac arrhythmia, which was mostly self-terminated. Conclusion Although the combination therapy of enteral Erythromycin Estolate and intravenous metoclopramide reduced GRV, the successful feeding rate and other patient-specific outcomes did not improve in mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance.
Sanguan Lerkiatbundit - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
efficacy and safety of enteral Erythromycin Estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide vs intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance a randomized double blind controlled pilot study
Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2020Co-Authors: Taniya Charoensareerat, Rungsun Bhurayanontachai, Sirima Sitaruno, Asma Navasakulpong, Apinya Boonpeng, Sanguan Lerkiatbundit, Sutthiporn PattharachayakulAbstract:Background In this pilot study, we aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of enteral Erythromycin Estolate in combination with intravenous metoclopramide compared to intravenous metoclopramide monotherapy in mechanically ventilated patients with enteral feeding intolerance. Methods This randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study included 35 mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance who were randomly assigned to receive 10-mg metoclopramide intravenously every 6-8 hours in combination with 250-mg enteral Erythromycin Estolate (study group) or placebo every 6 hours for 7 days. The primary outcome was an administered-to-target energy ratio of ≥80% at 48 hours, indicating a successful feeding. Secondary, prespecified outcomes were daily average gastric residual volume (GRV), total energy intake, administered-to-target energy ratio, hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and 28-day mortality. Results The rate of successful feeding was not significantly different between the study and placebo groups (47.1% and 61.1%, respectively; P = .51). The average daily GRV was significantly lower in the study group than in the placebo group (β = 91.58 [95% Wald CI, -164.35 to -18.8]), determined by generalized estimating equation. Other secondary outcomes were comparable, and the incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the 2 groups. One common complication was cardiac arrhythmia, which was mostly self-terminated. Conclusion Although the combination therapy of enteral Erythromycin Estolate and intravenous metoclopramide reduced GRV, the successful feeding rate and other patient-specific outcomes did not improve in mechanically ventilated patients with feeding intolerance.