A multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of ulimorelin and metoclopramide in the treatment of critically ill patients with enteral feeding intolerance: PROMOTE trial.

No Thumbnail Available

Date

2019-05-06

Authors

Heyland, Daren K
van Zanten, Arthur R H
Grau-Carmona, Teodoro
Evans, David
Beishuizen, Albertus
Schouten, Jeroen
Hoiting, Oscar
Bordejé, Maria Luisa
Krell, Kenneth
Klein, David J

Advisors

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Metrics
Google Scholar
Export

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Abstract

Enteral feeding intolerance (EFI) is a frequent problem in the intensive care unit (ICU), but current prokinetic agents have uncertain efficacy and safety profiles. The current study compared the efficacy and safety of ulimorelin, a ghrelin agonist, with metoclopramide in the treatment of EFI. One hundred twenty ICU patients were randomized 1:1 to ulimorelin or metoclopramide for 5 days. EFI was diagnosed by a gastric residual volume (GRV) ≥ 500 ml. A volume-based feeding protocol was employed, and enteral formulas were standardized. The primary end point was the percentage daily protein prescription (%DPP) received by patients over 5 days of treatment. Secondary end points included feeding success, defined as 80% DPP; gastric emptying, assessed by paracetamol absorption; incidences of recurrent intolerance (GRV ≥ 500 ml); vomiting or regurgitation; aspiration, defined by positive tracheal aspirates for pepsin; and pulmonary infection. One hundred twenty patients were randomized and received the study drug (ulimorelin 62, metoclopramide 58). Mean APACHE II and SOFA scores were 21.6 and 8.6, and 63.3% of patients had medical reasons for ICU admission. Ulimorelin and metoclopramide resulted in comparable %DPPs over 5 days of treatment (median [Q1, Q3]: 82.9% [38.4%, 100.2%] and 82.3% [65.6%, 100.2%], respectively, p = 0.49). Five-day rates of feeding success were 67.7% and 70.6% when terminations unrelated to feeding were excluded, and there were no differences in any secondary outcomes or adverse events between the two groups. Both prokinetic agents achieved similar rates of feeding success, and no safety differences between the two treatment groups were observed.

Description

MeSH Terms

APACHE
Adult
Aged
Antiemetics
Canada
Critical Illness
Double-Blind Method
Enteral Nutrition
Female
Gastric Emptying
Humans
Intensive Care Units
Macrocyclic Compounds
Male
Metoclopramide
Middle Aged
Netherlands
Organ Dysfunction Scores
Spain
United States

DeCS Terms

CIE Terms

Keywords

Enteral feeding intolerance, Gastric residual volume, Metoclopramide, PROMOTE, Ulimorelin, Volume-based feeding

Citation