Toward evidence-based prescribing at end of life: a comparative analysis of sustained-release morphine, oxycodone, and transdermal fentanyl, with pain, constipation, and caregiver interaction outcomes in hospice patients

Methylnaltrexone Treatment for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients with and without Cancer: Effect of Initial Dose

Purpose

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a common side effect of opioid therapy. Methylnaltrexone (MNTX) is a selective, peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist, with demonstrated efficacy in treating OIC. We pooled results from MNTX clinical trials to compare responses to an initial dose in patients with chronic cancer and noncancer pain.

Patients and Methods

This post hoc analysis used pooled data from 3 randomized, placebo-controlled studies of MNTX in patients with advanced illness with OIC. Assessments included the proportions of patients achieving rescue-free laxation (RFL) within 4 and 24 hours of the first study drug dose, time to RFL, current and worst pain intensity, and adverse events, stratified by the presence/absence of cancer.

Results

A total of 355 patients with cancer (MNTX n = 198, placebo n = 157) and 163 without active cancer (MNTX n = 83; placebo n = 80) were included. More patients treated with MNTX compared with those who received placebo achieved an RFL within 4 (cancer: MNTX, 61.1% vs placebo,15.3%, p<0.0001; noncancer: MNTX, 62.2% vs placebo, 17.5%, p<0.0001) and 24 hours (cancer: MNTX, 71.2% vs placebo, 41.4%, p<0.0001; noncancer: MNTX, 74.4% vs placebo, 37.5%, p<0.0001) of the initial dose. Cumulative RFL response rates within 4 hours of the first, second, or third dose of study drug were also higher in MNTX-treated patients. The estimated time to RFL was shorter among those who received MNTX and similar in cancer and noncancer patients. Mean pain scores declined similarly in all groups. The most common adverse events in both cancer and noncancer patients were abdominal pain, flatulence, and nausea.

Conclusion

After the first dose, MNTX rapidly induced a laxation response in the majority of both cancer and noncancer patients with advanced illness. Opioid-induced analgesia was not compromised, and adverse events were primarily gastrointestinal in nature. Methylnaltrexone is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for OIC in both cancer and noncancer patients.

Reductions in All-Cause Mortality Associated with the Use of Methylnaltrexone for Opioid-Induced Bowel Disorders: A Pooled Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Preclinical and clinical studies suggest that activation of the µ-opioid receptor may reduce overall survival and increase the risk for all-cause mortality in patients with cancer and noncancer pain. Methylnaltrexone, a selective, peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist, has demonstrated efficacy for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation. This retrospective analysis of 12 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of methylnaltrexone evaluated the treatment of opioid-induced bowel disorders in patients with advanced illness or noncancer pain.

METHODS

The risk of all-cause mortality within 30 days after the last dose of study medication during the double-blind phase was compared between methylnaltrexone and placebo groups. The data were further stratified by cancer vs noncancer, age, gender, and acute vs chronic diagnoses.

RESULTS

Pooled data included 2,526 methylnaltrexone-treated patients of which 33 died, and 1,192 placebo-treated patients of which 35 died. The mortality rate was 17.8 deaths/100 person-years of exposure in the methylnaltrexone group and 49.5 deaths/100 person-years of exposure for the placebo group. The all-cause mortality risk was significantly lower among patients receiving methylnaltrexone compared with placebo (hazard ratio: 0.399, 95% confidence interval: 0.25, 0.64; P = .0002), corresponding to a 60% risk reduction. Significant risk reductions were observed for those receiving methylnaltrexone who had cancer or chronic diagnoses. Methylnaltrexone-treated patients had a significantly reduced mortality risk compared with placebo regardless of age or gender.

CONCLUSIONS

Methylnaltrexone reduced all-cause mortality vs placebo treatment across multiple trials, suggesting methylnaltrexone may confer survival benefits in patients with opioid-induced bowel disorders taking opioids for cancer-related or chronic noncancer pain.

Subcutaneous Methylnaltrexone for Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Cancer versus Noncancer Patients: An Analysis of Efficacy and Safety Variables from Two Studies

Purpose

Methylnaltrexone inhibits opioid-induced constipation (OIC) by binding to peripheral µ-opioid receptors without impacting central opioid receptor mediated analgesia. This analysis compared methylnaltrexone efficacy and safety among advanced illness patients with and without active cancer and OIC.

Patients and Methods

This post hoc analysis included two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in adults with advanced illness and OIC who received subcutaneous methylnaltrexone. Efficacy endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving rescue-free laxation (RFL), time to RFL, weekly laxations within 24 hours after dosing, rescue laxative use, and pain scores. Adverse events were monitored for safety.

Results

After pooling, 178 patients received methylnaltrexone (n = 116 with cancer) and 185 received placebo (n = 114 with cancer). Median baseline daily opioid morphine equivalents (mg/d) were higher in cancer (methylnaltrexone: 180; placebo: 188) versus noncancer patients (methylnaltrexone: 120; placebo: 80). The proportions of patients achieving RFL within 4 hours after ≥2 of the first 4 doses were significantly greater with methylnaltrexone (cancer: 56.9%; noncancer: 58.1%) versus placebo (cancer: 5.3%; noncancer: 11.3%; P < 0.0001). The median time to laxation within 24 hours after the first methylnaltrexone dose was significantly shorter in cancer and noncancer patients versus placebo (cancer: 0.96 vs 22.53 hours, P < 0.0001; noncancer: 1.25 vs >24 hours, P = 0.0002). The mean number of weekly laxations within 24 hours after dosing by week 2 was significantly higher in methylnaltrexone- vs placebo-treated cancer and noncancer patients (cancer: 7.9 vs 4.9, P < 0.0001; noncancer: 8.4 vs 5.0, P < 0.0001). Methylnaltrexone reduced rescue laxative use without impacting pain scores. Consistent with previous data, methylnaltrexone was well tolerated in cancer and noncancer patients, and the AE profile did not suggest symptoms of opioid withdrawal.

Conclusion

Methylnaltrexone reduced RFL time in advanced-illness patients with and without active cancer, while maintaining pain control with opioid treatment despite higher baseline opioid use among cancer patients.

The influence of brain metastases on the central nervous system effects of methylnaltrexone: a post hoc analysis of 3 randomized, double-blind studies

PURPOSE

Peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists such as methylnaltrexone (MNTX, Relistor®) are indicated for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC). The structural properties unique to MNTX restrict it from traversing the blood-brain barrier (BBB); however, the BBB may become more permeable in patients with brain metastases. We investigated whether the presence of brain metastases in cancer patients compromises the central effects of opioids among patients receiving MNTX for OIC.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis of pooled data from 3 randomized, placebo-controlled trials included cancer patients with OIC who received MNTX or placebo. Endpoints included changes from baseline in pain scores, rescue-free laxation (RFL) within 4 or 24 h of the first dose, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), including those potentially related to opioid withdrawal symptoms.

RESULTS

Among 356 cancer patients in the pooled population, 47 (MNTX n = 27; placebo n = 20) had brain metastases and 309 (MNTX n = 172; placebo n = 137) did not have brain metastases. No significant differences in current pain, worst pain, or change in pain scores from baseline were observed between patients treated with MNTX or placebo. Among patients with brain metastases, a significantly greater proportion of patients who received MNTX versus placebo achieved an RFL within 4 h after the first dose (70.4% vs 15.0%, respectively, p = 0.0002). TEAEs were similar between treatment groups and were generally gastrointestinal in nature and not related to opioid withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

Focal disruptions of the BBB caused by brain metastases did not appear to alter central nervous system penetrance of MNTX.

Progress in understanding mechanisms of opioid-induced gastrointestinal adverse effects and respiratory depression

Opioids evoke analgesia through activation of opioid receptors (predominantly the μ opioid receptor) in the central nervous system. Opioid receptors are abundant in multiple regions of the central nervous system and the peripheral nervous system including enteric neurons. Opioid-related adverse effects such as constipation, nausea, and vomiting pose challenges for compliance and continuation of the therapy for chronic pain management. In the post-operative setting opioid-induced depression of respiration can be fatal. These critical limitations warrant a better understanding of their underpinning cellular and molecular mechanisms to inform the design of novel opioid analgesic molecules that are devoid of these unwanted side-effects. Research efforts on opioid receptor signalling in the past decade suggest that differential signalling pathways and downstream molecules preferentially mediate distinct pharmacological effects. Additionally, interaction among opioid receptors and, between opioid receptor and non-opioid receptors to form signalling complexes shows that opioid-induced receptor signalling is potentially more complicated than previously thought. This complexity provides an opportunity to identify and probe relationships between selective signalling pathway specificity and in vivo production of opioid-related adverse effects. In this review, we focus on current knowledge of the mechanisms thought to transduce opioid-induced gastrointestinal adverse effects (constipation, nausea, vomiting) and respiratory depression.

Opioids and GI Motility-Friend or Foe?

OPINION STATEMENT

The use of opioids for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain is growing at an alarming rate. Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OBD) is a common adverse effect of long-term opioid treatment manifesting as constipation, nausea, and vomiting. These effects are primarily mediated by peripheral μ-opioid receptors with resultant altered GI motility and function. As a result, patients may present with opioid-induced constipation (OIC), opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV), and/or narcotic bowel syndrome (NBS). This often leads to decreased quality of life and in many cases, discontinuation of opioid therapy. There is limited evidence to support the use of traditional anti-emetics and laxatives in the treatment of OBD. Tapering the dose of opioids, switching to transdermal application, opioid rotation, or dual-action opioids, such as tapentadol, may be helpful in the treatment of OBD. Novel agents, such as peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonists which target the cause of OIC, show promise in the treatment of OBD and should be considered when conventional laxatives fail. This chapter will review the pathophysiology of OBD, including OINV and OIC, and treatment options available.

Characterization of methadone as a β-arrestin-biased μ-opioid receptor agonist

BACKGROUND

Methadone is a unique µ-opioid receptor agonist. Although several researchers have insisted that the pharmacological effects of methadone are mediated through the blockade of NMDA receptor, the underlying mechanism by which methadone exerts its distinct pharmacological effects compared to those of other µ-opioid receptor agonists is still controversial. In the present study, we further investigated the pharmacological profile of methadone compared to those of fentanyl and morphine as measured mainly by the discriminative stimulus effect and in vitro assays for NMDA receptor binding, µ-opioid receptor-internalization, and µ-opioid receptor-mediated β-arrestin recruitment.

RESULTS

We found that fentanyl substituted for the discriminative stimulus effects of methadone, whereas a relatively high dose of morphine was required to substitute for the discriminative stimulus effects of methadone in rats. Under these conditions, the non-competitive NMDA receptor antagonist MK-801 did not substitute for the discriminative stimulus effects of methadone. In association with its discriminative stimulus effect, methadone failed to displace the receptor binding of MK801 using mouse brain membrane. Methadone and fentanyl, but not morphine, induced potent µ-opioid receptor internalization accompanied by the strong recruitment of β-arrestin-2 in µ-opioid receptor-overexpressing cells.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that methadone may, at least partly, produce its pharmacological effect as a β-arrestin-biased µ-opioid receptor agonist, similar to fentanyl, and NMDA receptor blockade is not the main contributor to the pharmacological profile of methadone.

Efficacy and tolerability of oral oxycodone and oxycodone/naloxone combination in opioid-naïve cancer patients: a propensity analysis

Background

World Health Organization step III opioids are required to relieve moderate-to-severe cancer pain; constipation is one of the most frequent opioid-induced side effects. A fixed combination, prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone (OXN), was developed with the aim of reducing opioid-related gastrointestinal side effects. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of prolonged-release oxycodone (OXY) alone to OXN in opioid-naïve cancer patients with moderate-to-severe pain.

Methods

Propensity analysis was utilized in this observational study, which evaluated the efficacy, safety, and quality of life.

Results

Out of the 210 patients recruited, 146 were matched using propensity scores and included in the comparative analysis. In both groups, pain intensity decreased by ≈3 points after 60 days, indicating comparable analgesic efficacy. Responder rates were similar between groups. Analgesia was achieved and maintained with similarly low and stable dosages over time (12.0–20.4 mg/d for OXY and 11.5–22.0 mg/d for OXN). Bowel Function Index (BFI) and laxative use per week improved from baseline at 30 days and 60 days in OXN recipients (−16, P<0.0001 and −3.5, P=0.02, respectively); BFI worsened in the OXY group. The overall incidence of drug-related adverse events was 28.9% in the OXY group and 8.2% in the OXN group (P<0.01); nausea and vomiting were two to five times less frequent with OXN. Quality of life improved to a significantly greater extent in patients receiving OXN compared to OXY (increase in Short Form-36 physical component score of 7.1 points vs 3.2 points, respectively; P<0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with chronic cancer pain, OXN provided analgesic effectiveness that is similar to OXY, with early and sustained benefits in tolerability. The relationship between responsiveness to OXN and clinical characteristics is currently being investigated.

Emerging therapies for patients with symptoms of opioid-induced bowel dysfunction

Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD) comprises gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, including dry mouth, nausea, vomiting, gastric stasis, bloating, abdominal pain, and opioid-induced constipation, which significantly impair patients’ quality of life and may lead to undertreatment of pain. Traditional laxatives are often prescribed for OIBD symptoms, although they display limited efficacy and exert adverse effects. Other strategies include prokinetics and change of opioids or their administration route. However, these approaches do not address underlying causes of OIBD associated with opioid effects on mostly peripheral opioid receptors located in the GI tract. Targeted management of OIBD comprises purely peripherally acting opioid receptor antagonists and a combination of opioid receptor agonist and antagonist. Methylnaltrexone induces laxation in 50%–60% of patients with advanced diseases and OIBD who do not respond to traditional oral laxatives without inducing opioid withdrawal symptoms with similar response (45%–50%) after an oral administration of naloxegol. A combination of prolonged-release oxycodone with prolonged-release naloxone (OXN) in one tablet (a ratio of 2:1) provides analgesia with limited negative effect on the bowel function, as oxycodone displays high oral bioavailability and naloxone demonstrates local antagonist effect on opioid receptors in the GI tract and is totally inactivated in the liver. OXN in daily doses of up to 80 mg/40 mg provides equally effective analgesia with improved bowel function compared to oxycodone administered alone in patients with chronic non-malignant and cancer-related pain. OIBD is a common complication of long-term opioid therapy and may lead to quality of life deterioration and undertreatment of pain. Thus, a complex assessment and management that addresses underlying causes and patomechanisms of OIBD is recommended. Newer strategies comprise methylnaltrexone or OXN administration in the management of OIBD, and OXN may be also considered as a preventive measure of OIBD development in patients who require opioid administration.

Effectiveness and tolerability of low-dose oral oxycodone/naloxone added to anticonvulsant therapy for noncancer neuropathic pain: an observational analysis

BACKGROUND

Opioids may alleviate chronic neuropathic pain (NP), but are considered second/third-line analgesia due to their poor gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability. A fixed combination of prolonged-release oxycodone and naloxone (OXN) has been developed to overcome the GI effects. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate analgesic effectiveness and tolerability of low-dose OXN in patients with moderate-to-severe noncancer NP despite analgesia.

METHODS

This retrospective observation of consecutive adult patients, treated open-label for 8 weeks at a single Italian centre, evaluated effectiveness (pain intensity numerical rating scale [NRS], Patients' Global Impression of Change [PGIC], Douleur Neuropathique 4 inventory [DN4] and Chronic Pain Sleep Inventory [CPSI]), doses of daily OXN and adjuvant medication, rescue paracetamol use, bowel function index (BFI), laxative use, and safety.

RESULTS

Of 200 patients (mean age 65.9 years; 54% female) with NP included in the analysis; 97% completed 8 weeks' treatment. At the observation start, all patients were taking anticonvulsants and complained of constipation, and 60% were receiving opioids. Pain intensity and DN4 score decreased significantly by endpoint (NRS p < 0.0001; DN4 p < 0.0001) and need for rescue analgesics abated. Reduction in pain intensity throughout the observation was similar regardless of NP aetiology. According to PGIC, 87.8% of patients were much/extremely improved, CPSI (p < 0.0001) and BFI were significantly improved (p < 0.0001) and laxative use decreased. No differences were found between patients <65 years vs those ≥65 years. OXN was generally well tolerated.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

Study limitations including the retrospective observational design, the lack of a control group and the single-centre design may limit the generalizability of our findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose OXN (25.0 ± 12.5 mg/day) added to anticonvulsants was highly effective in controlling noncancer NP of varied aetiology, with reduced need for rescue analgesia and improved quality of sleep, and was well tolerated, with improved bowel function and reduced laxative use. The efficacy and tolerability of OXN demonstrated in this real-world setting suggest its utility in this difficult to manage patient population.

Efficacy and gastrointestinal tolerability of oral oxycodone/naloxone combination for chronic pain in outpatients with cancer: an observational study

Combination opioid agonist/antagonist therapy has been shown to preserve bowel function in patients with chronic cancer pain. This retrospective study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of prolonged-released fixed-dose oxycodone-naloxone (PR OXN) in consecutive outpatients with chronic cancer pain. Of 206 patients prescribed PR OXN (mean age 61.3 ± 12.9 years; 52.9% female), 31.5% were opioid naïve. PR OXN was associated with a significant decrease in pain score measured on a visual analogue scale over 28 days (P < .0001), without adverse effects on bowel function, nor change in laxative use. PR OXN efficacy and tolerability were similar in opioid-naïve and -experienced patients, and among age-stratified subgroups. No severe side effects occurred. In a real-life outpatient setting, PR OXN provided analgesia without bowel dysfunction in patients with chronic cancer pain.

Mechanisms that underlie μ-opioid receptor agonist-induced constipation: differential involvement of μ-opioid receptor sites and responsible regions

Reducing the side effects of pain treatment is one of the most important strategies for improving the quality of life of cancer patients. However, little is known about the mechanisms that underlie these side effects, especially constipation induced by opioid receptor agonists; i.e., do they involve naloxonazine-sensitive versus -insensitive sites or central-versus-peripheral μ-opioid receptors? The present study was designed to investigate the mechanisms of μ-opioid receptor agonist-induced constipation (i.e., the inhibition of gastrointestinal transit and colonic expulsion) that are antagonized by the peripherally restricted opioid receptor antagonist naloxone methiodide and naloxonazine in mice. Naloxonazine attenuated the fentanyl-induced inhibition of gastrointestinal transit more potently than the inhibition induced by morphine or oxycodone. Naloxone methiodide suppressed the oxycodone-induced inhibition of gastrointestinal transit more potently than the inhibition induced by morphine, indicating that μ-opioid receptor agonists induce the inhibition of gastrointestinal transit through different mechanisms. Furthermore, we found that the route of administration (intracerebroventricular, intrathecally, and/or intraperitoneally) of naloxone methiodide differentially influenced the suppressive effect on the inhibition of colorectal transit induced by morphine, oxycodone, and fentanyl. These results suggest that morphine, oxycodone, and fentanyl induce constipation through different mechanisms (naloxonazine-sensitive versus naloxonazine-insensitive sites and central versus peripheral opioid receptors), and these findings may help us to understand the characteristics of the constipation induced by each μ-opioid receptor agonist and improve the quality of life by reducing constipation in patients being treated for pain.

The impact of opioid analgesics on the gastrointestinal tract function and the current management possibilities

Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OIBD) comprises gastrointestinal symptoms such as constipation, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, gastro-oesophageal reflux, delayed digestion, abdominal pain, bloating, hard stool and incomplete evacuation that significantly deteriorate patients' quality of life and compliance. Approximately one third of patients treated with opioids do not adhere to the opioid regimen or simply quit the treatment due to OIBD. Several strategies are undertaken to prevent or treat OIBD. Traditional oral laxatives are used but their effectiveness is limited and they display adverse effects. Other possibilities comprise opioid switch or changing the administration route. New therapies target opioid receptors in the gut that seem to be the main source of OIBD. One is a combination of an opioid and opioid antagonist (oxycodone/naloxone) in prolonged-release tablets, and another is a purely peripherally acting opioid receptor antagonist (methylnaltrexone) available in subcutaneous injections. The aim of this article is to review the pathomechanism and possible treatment strategies of OIBD.

A systematic review of oxycodone in the management of cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Oxycodone is often used as an opioid analgesic for moderate to severe cancer-related pain, but its use varies across Europe. This systematic literature review forms the basis of guidelines for oxycodone use within the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative opioid guidelines project conducted on behalf of the European Association for Palliative Care.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to identify and assess the quality of evidence for the use of oxycodone for cancer pain in adults.

METHODS

The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MedLine, EMBASE and CINAHL were systematically searched in addition to hand searching of relevant journals. Studies were included if they reported a clinical outcome relevant to the use of oxycodone in adult patients with moderate to severe cancer pain. Any form and route of oxycodone was included except intrathecal. No direct comparator was required for inclusion and studies were excluded if patients had previously switched from another strong opioid because of intolerable adverse effects or poor efficacy. This is a narrative systematic review, using the GRADE approach to assess the quality of studies and to formulate guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine original studies were identified including a meta-analysis and 14 randomized controlled trials. The identified meta-analysis included three trials comparing oxycodone to morphine and one comparing oxycodone to hydromorphone. Four other randomized trials compared oxycodone with other opioids. The remaining randomized controlled trials compared different routes of administration or formulations of oxycodone. No additional studies that would have been suitable for addition to the meta-analysis were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from the included trials of a significant difference in analgesia or adverse effects between oxycodone and morphine or hydromorphone. The evidence was graded as high quality on the basis of a well-conducted meta-analysis, with no limitations likely to affect the outcome, in addition to consistency in the results of the other studies. The research was conducted using participants relevant to cancer and palliative care populations. Oxycodone can be recommended as an alternative to morphine or hydromorphone for cancer-related pain.

Variation in pain medication use in end-of-life care

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common and distressing symptom at the end of life that medications can help relieve. We sought to explore variation in approaches to pharmaceutical management of pain among hospice-eligible patients and to determine if variation was explained by patient or site of care characteristics. Variation in medication use may suggest areas for best practices or quality improvement in medication use in end-of-life care.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of randomized trial data, examining use of five medication classes: opiates, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), adjuvant pain medications (tricyclics and antiseizure), stimulants, and antianxiety medications in 16 study sites nationwide. Descriptive statistics were generated for patient-level data and by site. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios were calculated to compare patient and location of care characteristics with each medication class use by site.

RESULTS

We found variation in medication use was not predicted by most patient characteristics or location of care (home versus facility). Use of all types of pain medications decreased with age (odds ratio [OR] 0.75 [0.63-0.90]). Medication use varied between sites: a range of 14%-83% of patients were on different types of opiates, 0%-40% on NSAIDS, 20%-69% on benzodiazepines, 0%-25% on adjuvant medications, and 0%-23% were on acetaminophen at any time during the data collection period.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain and adjuvant medication use differs widely by site of care. Further research is needed to determine the extent to which provider and patient choice contribute to prescribing variation, and to explore associations between patient symptoms, medication variation, and patient care quality.

Critical illness, gastrointestinal complications, and medication therapy during enteral feeding in critically ill adult patients

Critically ill patients who are subjected to high stress or with severe injury can rapidly break down their body protein and energy stores. Unless adequate nutrition is provided, malnutrition and protein wasting may occur, which can negatively affect patient outcome. Enteral nutrition (EN) is the mainstay of nutrition support therapy in patients with a functional gastrointestinal (GI) tract who cannot take adequate oral nutrition. EN in critically ill patients provides the benefits of maintaining gut functionality, integrity, and immunity as well as decreasing infectious complications. However, the ability to provide timely and adequate EN to critically ill patients is often hindered by GI motility disorders and complications associated with EN. This paper reviews the GI complications and intolerances associated with EN in critically ill patients and provides recommendations for their prevention and treatment. It also addresses the role of commonly used medications in the intensive care unit and their impact on GI motility and EN delivery.

Opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: prevalence, pathophysiology and burden

As a result of the undesired action of opioids on the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, patients receiving opioid medication for chronic pain often experience opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OBD), the most common and debilitating symptom of which is constipation. Based on clinical experience and a comprehensive MEDLINE literature review, this paper provides the primary care physician with an overview of the prevalence, pathophysiology and burden of OBD. Patients with OBD suffer from a wide range of symptoms including constipation, decreased gastric emptying, abdominal cramping, spasm, bloating, delayed GI transit and the formation of hard dry stools. OBD can have a serious negative impact on quality of life (QoL) and the daily activities that patients feel able to perform. To relieve constipation associated with OBD, patients often use laxatives chronically (associated with risks) or alter/abandon their opioid medication, potentially sacrificing analgesia. Physicians should have greater appreciation of the prevalence, symptoms and burden of OBD. In light of the serious negative impact OBD can have on QoL, physicians should encourage dialogue with patients to facilitate optimal symptomatic management of the condition. There is a pressing need for new therapies that act upon the underlying mechanisms of OBD.