4.8 Article

High-dose oral erythromycin decreased the incidence of parenteral nutrition-associated cholestasis in preterm infants

Journal

GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 132, Issue 5, Pages 1726-1739

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.03.043

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background & Aims: Feeding intolerance because of functional gastrointestinal dysmotility and parenteral nutrition-associated cholestasis (PNAC) are common problems in preterm, very-low-birth-weight (VLBW) infants. This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study aimed to assess the effectiveness of high-dose oral erythromycin as a prokinetic agent in decreasing the incidence of PNAC. Two secondary end points, including the time to achieve full enteral feeding and the duration of parenteral nutrition, were also evaluated. Methods: infants consecutively admitted to the neonatal unit were randomized to receive erythromycin (12.5 mg/kg/dose every 6 hours for 14 days) or an equivalent volume of normal saline (placebo) if they attained less than half the total daily fluid intake (< 75 mL/kg/day) as milk feeds on day 14 of life. Results: Of 182 VLBW infants enrolled, 91 received erythromycin. The incidence of PNAC was significantly lower in erythromycin-treated infants (18/91) compared with placebo infants (37/91; P =.003). Treated infants achieved full enteral nutrition significantly earlier (mean, 10.1; SE, 1.7 days; P < .001), and the duration of parenteral nutrition was also significantly decreased by 10 days (P < .001). Importantly, fewer infants receiving erythromycin had 2 or more episodes of septicemia (n = 4) compared with placebo patients (n = 13, P = .03). No serious adverse effect was associated with erythromycin treatment. Conclusions: High-dose oral erythromycin can be considered as a rescue measure for VLBW infants who fail to establish adequate enteral nutrition and in whom anatomically obstructive pathologies of the gastrointestinal tract have been excluded.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available