Naturally occurring fruit juices dislodge meat bolus obstruction in vitro*

Conservative management of oesophageal soft food bolus impaction

BACKGROUND

Impaction of a soft food bolus in the oesophagus causes dysphagia and regurgitation. If the bolus does not pass spontaneously, then the patient is at risk of aspiration, dehydration, perforation, and death. Definitive management is with endoscopic intervention, recommended within 24 hours. Prior to endoscopy, many patients undergo a period of observation, awaiting spontaneous disimpaction, or may undergo enteral or parenteral treatments to attempt to dislodge the bolus. There is little consensus as to which of these conservative strategies is safe and effective to be used in this initial period, before resorting to definitive endoscopic management for persistent impaction.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of non-endoscopic conservative treatments in the management of soft food boluses impacted within the oesophagus.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases, using relevant search terms: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL. The date of the search was 18 August 2019. We screened the reference lists of relevant studies and reviews on the topic to identify any additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of the management of acute oesophageal soft food bolus impaction, in adults and children, reporting the incidence of disimpaction (confirmed radiologically or clinically by return to oral diet) without the need for endoscopic intervention. We did not include studies focusing on sharp or solid object impaction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 890 unique records through the electronic searches. We excluded 809 clearly irrelevant records and retrieved 81 records for further assessment. We subsequently included one randomised controlled trial that met the eligibility criteria, which was conducted in four Swedish centres and randomised 43 participants to receive either intravenous diazepam followed by glucagon, or intravenous placebos. The effect of the active substances compared with placebo on rates of disimpaction without intervention is uncertain, as the numbers from this single study were small, and the rates were similar (38% versus 32%; risk ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.51 to 2.75, P = 0.69). The certainty of the evidence using GRADE for this outcome is low. Data on adverse events were lacking.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently inadequate data to recommend the use of any enteral or parenteral treatments in the management of acute oesophageal soft food bolus impaction. There is also inadequate data regarding potential adverse events from the use of these treatments, or from potential delays in definitive endoscopic management. Caution should be exercised when using any conservative management strategies in these patients.

Cola therapy for oesophageal food bolus impactions a case series

Introduction

This retrospective case series describes the use of cola to immediately treat complete oesophageal food bolus obstructions in the emergency centre. Short of emergent endoscopy – which is invasive, expensive, not without adverse events, and often unavailable in low-resource settings – no other proven therapies exist to relieve oesophageal food impactions.

Methods

We performed a chart review of adults with complete oesophageal food bolus obstructions presenting to two Dutch emergency centres. Our primary outcome was cola’s success rate in resolving the obstruction. Our secondary outcome was adverse event occurrence.

Results

We identified 22 cola interventions in 19 patients, the majority of whom (77.3%) were male. The median age was 59 years (IQR 29–73). All presentations were due to meat impaction. Endoscopy revealed relevant upper gastrointestinal pathology in 54.5%. When initiated in the emergency centre, cola successfully resolved 59% of complete oesophageal obstructions. No adverse events were reported in patients successfully treated with cola.

Discussion

While keenly aware of our retrospective study’s limitations, we found a promising success rate for cola as an acute intervention for oesophageal food bolus impactions. We registered no adverse events attributable to cola. Also, given that cola is cheap, widely available and seemingly safe we believe it can be considered in patients with oesophageal obstructions due to food, either as pre-endoscopy treatment or in case endoscopy is not available at all. We think our findings provide an impetus for prospective research on this intervention.

Effects of Kivia powder on gut health in patients with occasional constipation: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of Kivia powder on supporting overall gut health through the relief of the discomfort of occasional constipation.

Design

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial.

Interventions

The investigational product for this study was Kivia powder (Vital Food Processors Ltd., Auckland, New Zealand), containing the active ingredient Zyactinase™, 5.5 g taken daily for four weeks.

Results

One hundred thirty-eight subjects reporting occasional constipation were screened and 87 were randomized to placebo (n = 44) and product (n = 43). Bowel movement frequency, as measured by both average daily spontaneous bowel movements (SBM) and complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBM), were the same in both groups at baseline. There were significant increases in spontaneous bowel movements at week 1 (p = 0.001), week 2 (p = 0.001), week 3 (p = 0.000), and week 4 (p = 0.000) compared to baseline. SBM demonstrated significant differences between the treatment group and the placebo group at week 3 (p = 0.000), and week 4 (p = 0.020). The treatment group demonstrated a significantly higher rate of SBM at week 3 (p = 000) and from baseline to week 4 (p = 0.019). Significant increases in complete spontaneous bowel movements were observed at week 1 (p = 0.000), week 2 (p = 0.000), week 3 (p = 0.000), and week 4 (p = 0.000) compared to baseline. Moreover, CSBM was significantly higher for the treatment group compared to placebo at week 2 (p = 0.001). The change in average daily CSBM from baseline to week 2 was significantly higher in the treatment group than in the placebo group (p = 0.004).

Abdominal discomfort or pain demonstrated significant differences between groups at week 1 (p = 0.044) and week 3 (p = 0.026). Flatulence was significantly lower for active group compared to placebo at week 2 (p = 0.047) and week 3 (p = 0.023). The number of bowel movements associated with urgency was significantly lower in the treatment group compared to the placebo group at week 3 (p = 0.048). In addition, it was decreased from baseline to week 1 (p = 0.040) and from baseline to week 3 (p = 0.024) in the treatment group, while the placebo group did not report any reductions in bowel urgency. Bowel movements in the treatment arm were significantly smoother and softer by week 2 (p = 0.020) and week 3 (p = 0.041).

Conclusions

Treatment with Kivia powder, an extract of kiwifruit containing Zyactinase™, for four weeks was well tolerated and more effective than placebo in gently enhancing bowel movement frequency and reducing abdominal pain and flatulence in subjects with occasional constipation.

Trial registration

ISRCTN: ISRCTN49036618