PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15625029

Chronic Intestinal Pseudo-Obstruction.

Abstract

Chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction (CIP) is a gastrointestinal motility disorder characterized by chronic symptoms and signs of bowel obstruction in the absence of a fixed, lumen-occluding lesion. Radiographic findings consist of dilated bowel with air-fluid levels. Pseudo-obstruction is an uncommon condition and can result from primary or secondary causes. The management is primarily focused on symptom control and nutritional support to prevent weight loss and malnutrition. The principles of management of patients with CIP involve 1) establishing a correct clinical diagnosis and excluding mechanical obstruction; 2) differentiating between idiopathic and secondary forms; 3) performing a symptomatic and physiologic assessment of the parts of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract involved by manometric and whole gut transit scintigraphic studies; 4) careful assessment of nutritional status of the patient; and 5) developing a therapeutic plan addressing the patient's symptoms and nutritional status. Treatment of CIP includes frequent small meals with a low-fat, low-fiber diet, liquid nutritional supplements may be needed; prokinetic agents such as metoclopramide may help to reduce upper GI symptoms. Trials of drugs such as erythromycin, domperidone, cisapride, and tegaserod may be considered if there is no response. Subcutaneous octreotide may be helpful to improve small bowel dysmotility especially in patients with scleroderma. In patients with symptoms suggestive of bacterial overgrowth, courses of antibiotics such as metronidazole, ciprofloxacin, and doxycycline may be needed. Nutritional assessment and support is an important aspect of management. Enteral nutrition is usually preferred. In carefully selected patients, feeding jejunostomy with or without decompression gastrostomy may be tried. Long term parenteral nutrition should be reserved for patients who can not tolerate enteral nutrition. Complications associated with total parenteral nutrition include infections, sepsis, and cholestatic hepatic dysfunction.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kashyap V Panganamamula, Henry P Parkman. 2005. Chronic Intestinal Pseudo-Obstruction.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-005-0046-4

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗