Altered spontaneous contractions of the ileum by anesthetic agents in rats exposed to peritonitis

Postoperative recovery of colorectal patients enhanced with dexmedetomidine (PReCEDex): a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative administration of dexmedetomidine has shown promise in improving postoperative gastrointestinal function. In the context of colorectal surgery, the results remain inconsistent. This review aims to provide a synthesis of studies assessing the effect of dexmedetomidine on postoperative gastrointestinal function in colorectal surgery patients.

METHODS

CENTRAL, Emcare, Embase, and MEDLINE were searched up to September 2023. Randomized controlled trials involving adult patients (≥ 18 years) undergoing elective colorectal surgery, comparing dexmedetomidine administration to a control group, and reporting on postoperative gastrointestinal function were included. Non-comparative and emergent procedures were excluded. Primary outcome was time to first flatus or bowel movement, and secondary outcomes included length of stay and time to solid oral intake. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized studies.

RESULTS

After screening 1194 citations, eight studies were included. Studies comprised of 570 patients in the dexmedetomidine group (mean age: 65.8 years, 43% female, mean BMI: 22.7 kg/m2) and 556 patients in control group (mean age 70.6 years, 40% female, mean BMI 22.5 kg/m2). Dexmedetomidine administration resulted in a shorter time to flatus (MD -4.55 h, 95% CI: 20.14-8.95, p < 0.005, very low certainty of evidence), a shorter time to first bowel movement (MD -11.9 h, 95% CI: 18.74-5.05, p < 0.005, very low certainty of evidence), a shorter time to solid oral intake (MD -4.34 h, 95% CI: 17.43-11.24, p < 0.005, moderate certainty of evidence), and a shorter length of stay (MD -.06 days, 95% CI: 1.99-0.12, p < 0.05, very low certainty of evidence).

CONCLUSION

In adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, intraoperative use of dexmedetomidine results in clinically meaningful improvements in postoperative gastrointestinal function and consequently, shorter length of stay. Therefore, dexmedetomidine may serve as a valuable adjunct in enhancing postoperative recovery of patients following elective colorectal surgery, thereby reducing healthcare utilization, and improving patient outcomes.

Molecular mechanisms of cholinergic neurotransmission in visceral smooth muscles with a focus on receptor-operated TRPC4 channel and impairment of gastrointestinal motility by general anaesthetics and anxiolytics

Acetylcholine is the primary excitatory neurotransmitter in visceral smooth muscles, wherein it binds to and activates two muscarinic receptors subtypes, M2 and M3, thus causing smooth muscle excitation and contraction. The first part of this review focuses on the types of cells involved in cholinergic neurotransmission and on the molecular mechanisms underlying acetylcholine-induced membrane depolarisation, which is the central event of excitation-contraction coupling causing Ca2+ entry via L-type Ca2+ channels and smooth muscle contraction. Studies of the muscarinic cation current in intestinal myocytes (mICAT) revealed its main molecular counterpart, receptor-operated TRPC4 channel, which is activated in synergy by both M2 and M3 receptors. M3 receptors activation is of permissive nature, while activation of M2 receptors via Gi/o proteins that are coupled to them plays a direct role in TRPC4 opening. Our understanding of signalling pathways underlying mICAT generation has vastly expanded in recent years through studies of TRPC4 gating in native cells and its regulation in heterologous cells. Recent studies using muscarinic receptor knockout have established that at low agonist concentration activation of both M2 receptor and the M2/M3 receptor complex elicits smooth muscle contraction, while at high agonist concentration M3 receptor function becomes dominant. Based on this knowledge, in the second part of this review we discuss the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the numerous anticholinergic effects on neuroactive drugs, in particular general anaesthetics and anxiolytics, which can significantly impair gastrointestinal motility. This article is part of the Special Issue on "Ukrainian Neuroscience".

Dexmedetomidine Has Differential Effects on the Contractility of Equine Jejunal Smooth Muscle Layers In Vitro

α2 agonists are frequently used in horses with colic, even though they have been shown to inhibit gastrointestinal motility. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of dexmedetomidine on small intestinal in vitro contractility during different phases of ischaemia. Experimental segmental jejunal ischaemia was induced in 12 horses under general anaesthesia, and intestinal samples were taken pre-ischaemia and following ischaemia and reperfusion. Spontaneous and electrically evoked contractile activity of the circular and longitudinal smooth muscles were determined in each sample with and without the addition of dexmedetomidine. During a second experiment, tetrodotoxin was added to determine if the effect was neurogenic. We found that the circular smooth muscle (CSM) contractility was not affected by ischaemia, whereas the longitudinal smooth muscle (LSM) showed an increase in both spontaneous and induced contractile activity. The addition of dexmedetomidine caused a decrease in the spontaneous contractile activity of CSM, but an increase in that of LSM, which was not mediated by the enteric nervous system. During ischaemia, dexmedetomidine also mildly increased the electrically induced contractile activity in LSM. These results may indicate a stimulatory effect of dexmedetomidine on small intestinal contractility. However, the influence of dexmedetomidine administration on intestinal motility in vivo needs to be further investigated.

A comprehensive evaluation between dexmedetomidine and midazolam for intraoperative sedation in the elderly: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The sedative effect of intraoperative sedation in elderly surgery exerts critical influence on the prognosis. Comparison on the safety and efficacy between dexmedetomidine and midazolam in many clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was inconsistent and suspicious. We aim to comprehensively evaluate the safety and efficacy between dexmedetomidine and midazolam for intraoperative sedation in the elderly via meta-analysis and systematic reviews.

METHODS

RCTs regarding to the comparison of sedative effects and safety between dexmedetomidine and midazolam in elderly patients (aged ≥ 60 years) will be comprehensively searched from 2000 October to 2022 May through 4 English databases and 4 Chinese databases. After extraction in duplicate, the systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed on the primary outcomes (hemodynamic changes, sedative effect, cognitive function) and secondary outcomes (analgesic effect, surgical characteristics, complications, or adverse reactions) for assessing the two therapy methods using Review Manager software (Version 5.3). Sensitivity analysis will be conducted to evaluate the heterogeneity of the results; funnel plot and Egger's trial will be performed to analyze publication bias of the included studies, and trial sequential analysis will be applied to assess the robustness and reliability of preliminary meta-analysis results. Finally, rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations on the meta results will be summarized by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis will evaluate the safety and efficacy between dexmedetomidine and midazolam for intraoperative sedation in the elderly; it will give an insight on the application of dexmedetomidine and midazolam and will provide evidence-based reference for clinical decision-making.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021221897.

The effect of thymol on acetylcholine-induced contractions of the rat ileum and uterus under ex vivo conditions

Thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.) is a well-known medicinal plant, the aerial parts of which have long been used internally or externally as a traditional remedy for various diseases. Thyme essential oils have important pharmaceutical applications and are regularly used in the pharmaceutical, food and cosmetic industries. In folk medicine, thyme preparations are used to treat respiratory, digestive, cardiovascular and nervous disorders, as well as to relieve dysmenorrhea. Thymol, a major constituent of Thymus vulgaris essential oil, has been shown to affect skeletal and smooth muscle excitation and contraction. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to evaluate its effect on acetylcholine (ACh)-induced rat intestinal and uterine preparations. Isolated ileum and uterine horn preparations were placed in a 20-ml organ bath containing Tyrode or De Jalon solution and exposed to graded concentrations of ACh (0.036, 0.109, 0.36, 1.09, 3,6, 10.9, and 36 μM) and either 0.02 or 0.2 mM thymol. Additionally, the dose–response relationship of thymol impact on intestinal and uterine contraction was evaluated. Contraction changes were monitored using an isometric transducer. Thymol at the higher dose (0.2 mM) significantly reduced ACh-induced intestinal and uterine contractions. Thus, this study provides new important data on competitive actions between thymol and ACh. In the dose–response study, the IC₅₀ values were calculated as 5.26 mM for the ileum and 5.35 mM for the uterus. Our results demonstrated the efficacy of thymol in reducing ileal and uterine smooth muscle contractions, thus supporting the use of thyme in traditional medicine in the treatment of digestive disorders and painful menstrual cramps.

Effect of Intraoperative Dexmedetomidine on Recovery of Gastrointestinal Function After Abdominal Surgery in Older Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Postoperative ileus is common after abdominal surgery, and small clinical studies have reported that intraoperative administration of dexmedetomidine may be associated with improvements in postoperative gastrointestinal function. However, findings have been inconsistent and study samples have been small. Further examination of the effects of intraoperative dexmedetomidine on postoperative gastrointestinal function is needed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of intraoperative intravenous dexmedetomidine vs placebo on postoperative gastrointestinal function among older patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University in Hefei, China (lead site), and 12 other tertiary hospitals in Anhui Province, China. A total of 808 participants aged 60 years or older who were scheduled to receive abdominal surgery with an expected surgical duration of 1 to 6 hours were enrolled. The study was conducted from August 21, 2018, to December 9, 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

Dexmedetomidine infusion (a loading dose of 0.5 μg/kg over 15 minutes followed by a maintenance dose of 0.2 μg/kg per hour) or placebo infusion (normal saline) during surgery.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was time to first flatus. Secondary outcomes were postoperative gastrointestinal function measured by the I-FEED (intake, feeling nauseated, emesis, physical examination, and duration of symptoms) scoring system, time to first feces, time to first oral feeding, incidence of delirium, pain scores, sleep quality, postoperative nausea and vomiting, hospital costs, and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Among 808 patients enrolled, 404 were randomized to receive intraoperative dexmedetomidine, and 404 were randomized to receive placebo. In total, 133 patients (60 in the dexmedetomidine group and 73 in the placebo group) were excluded because of protocol deviations, and 675 patients (344 in the dexmedetomidine group and 331 in the placebo group; mean [SD] age, 70.2 [6.1] years; 445 men [65.9%]) were included in the per-protocol analysis. The dexmedetomidine group had a significantly shorter time to first flatus (median, 65 hours [IQR, 48-78 hours] vs 78 hours [62-93 hours], respectively; P < .001), time to first feces (median, 85 hours [IQR, 68-115 hours] vs 98 hours [IQR, 74-121 hours]; P = .001), and hospital length of stay (median, 13 days [IQR, 10-17 days] vs 15 days [IQR, 11-18 days]; P = .005) than the control group. Postoperative gastrointestinal function (as measured by the I-FEED score) and delirium incidence were similar in the dexmedetomidine and control groups (eg, 248 patients [72.1%] vs 254 patients [76.7%], respectively, had I-FEED scores indicating normal postoperative gastrointestinal function; 18 patients [5.2%] vs 12 patients [3.6%] had delirium on postoperative day 3).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, the administration of intraoperative dexmedetomidine reduced the time to first flatus, time to first feces, and length of stay after abdominal surgery. These results suggest that this therapy may be a viable strategy to enhance postoperative recovery of gastrointestinal function among older adults.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR1800017232.

Inhibitory Effects of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on Gastrointestinal Tract Motility Involving Impaired Enteric Glia Ca2+ Response in Mice

Propofol and dexmedetomidine are popular used for sedation in ICU, however, inadequate attention has been paid to their effect on gastrointestinal tract (GIT) motility. Present study aimed to compare the effect of propofol and dexmedetomidine on GIT motility at parallel level of sedation and explore the possible mechanism. Male C57BL/6 mice (8-10 weeks) were randomly divided into control, propofol and dexmedetomidine group. After intraperitoneal injection of propofol or dexmedetomidine, comparable sedative level was confirmed by sedative score, physiological parameters and electroencephalogram (EEG). Different segments of GIT motility in vivo (gastric emptying, small intestine transit, distal colon bead expulsion, stool weight and number of fecal pellets, gastrointestinal transit and whole gut transit time) and colonic migrating motor complexes (CMMCs) pattern in vitro were evaluated. The Ca2+ response of primary enteric glia was examined under the treatment of propofol or dexmedetomidine. There is little difference in physiological parameters and composite permutation entropy index (CPEI) between administration of 50 mg/kg propofol and 40 μg/kg dexmedetomidine, indicated that parallel level of sedation was reached. Data showed that propofol and dexmedetomidine had significantly inhibitory effect on GIT motility while dexmedetomidine was stronger. Also, the amplitude (ΔF/F0) of Ca2+ response in primary enteric glia was attenuated after treated with the sedatives while the effect of dexmedetomidine was greater than propofol. These findings demonstrated that dexmedetomidine caused stronger inhibitory effects on GIT motility in sedative mice, which may involve impaired Ca2+ response in enteric glia. Hence, dexmedetomidine should be carefully applied especially for potential GIT dysmotility patient.

Organ-Protective Effects and the Underlying Mechanism of Dexmedetomidine

Dexmedetomidine (DEX) is a highly selective α2 adrenergic receptor (α2AR) agonist currently used in clinical settings. Because DEX has dose-dependent advantages of sedation, analgesia, antianxiety, inhibition of sympathetic nervous system activity, cardiovascular stabilization, and significant reduction of postoperative delirium and agitation, but does not produce respiratory depression and agitation, it is widely used in clinical anesthesia and ICU departments. In recent years, much clinical study and basic research has confirmed that DEX has a protective effect on a variety of organs, including the nervous system, heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, and small intestine. It acts by reducing the inflammatory response in these organs, activating antiapoptotic signaling pathways which protect cells from damage. Therefore, based on wide clinical application and safety, DEX may become a promising clinical multiorgan protection drug in the future. In this article, we review the physiological effects related to organ protection in α2AR agonists along with the organ-protective effects and mechanisms of DEX to understand their combined application value.

The Effect of Anesthetic Regimens on Intestinal Absorption of Passively Absorbed Drugs in Rats

PURPOSE

Different anesthetic regimens are used during single pass intestinal perfusion (SPIP) experiments for the study of intestinal drug absorption in rats. We examined the ketamine/xylazine anesthetic combination to evaluate its influence on drug absorption compared to older regimens. Additionally, we examined whether supplementary analgesia has any effect on drug absorption and the effect of the different anesthetic regimens on induction time and stress response.

METHODS

Rats were anesthetized using four different anesthetic regimens; ketamine/midazolam, pentobarbital, ketamine/xylazine and ketamine/xylazine/butorphanol. Three model drugs were administered to rat intestines and P_eff was calculated. Stress response was evaluated by quantifying blood corticosterone levels and induction time was recorded.

RESULTS

We found absorption under pentobarbital to be higher or similar to absorption under ketamine/midazolam. These results partly correlate with past literature data. Ketamine/xylazine was found to give similar or higher P_eff compared to pentobarbital and ketamine/midazolam. Addition of butorphanol did not affect absorption and reduced induction time and stress.

CONCLUSIONS

In studies of intestinal drug absorption, the ketamine/xylazine combination is superior to other anesthetic regimens as it is more convenient and seems to affect absorption to a lesser extent. Addition of butorphanol is highly recommended as it did not affect absorption but led to a more effective and less stress inducing experiment.

Comparison of In Vitro Effects of Opioid Analgesics on Spontaneous Proximal and Distal Colon Contractions in Healthy Rats and Rats with Peritonitis

Objective

The goal of this study was to investigate and compare the effects of opioids on proximal and distal colon contractions in normal rats and rats with peritonitis, with and without the presence of naloxone in the environment.

Methods

The study was approved by Cumhuriyet University Ethics committee. In this study, 16 Wistar Albino male rats were used. Rats were divided into two groups. Peritonitis was induced using a cecum ligation and perforation method, 24 h before the tissues of rats in the peritonitis group were collected, and sham surgery was performed 24 h before the tissues of rats in the control group were collected. Twenty-four hours after the surgery, rats' organs were harvested and hung in organ baths. Concentration-dependent inhibitory effects of morphine and meperidine on spontaneous intestinal movements were observed. Any differences between the groups were tested using the Kruskal-Wallis test, and any differences between the groups were tested using the Tukey test.

Results

No significant difference was observed between the proximal and distal colon smooth muscle contraction responses in both groups after 80 mM Potassium Chloride (KCl) injection (p>0.005). In the peritonitis group, amplitudes and frequencies of spontaneous contractions in proximal and distal colon significantly increased (p<0.05). Drugs decreased the amplitude and frequency responses in the control group (p<0.05). In the peritonitis group, whereas morphine decreased the amplitude and frequency responses in comparison with the control group (p<0.05), meperidine did not cause any significant changes (p>0.05). In both groups, adding naloxone to the organ baths before adding opioids completely blocked the morphine's inhibitory effect on the amplitude and frequency (p<0.05), but it could not completely block the inhibition caused by meperidine.

Conclusion

Morphine and meperidine exhibit an inhibitory effect on the intestinal motility in both groups. This effect can be blocked by naloxone completely in morphine, and partially in meperidine.

Effect of Dexmedetomidine on Mortality and Ventilator-Free Days in Patients Requiring Mechanical Ventilation With Sepsis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Dexmedetomidine provides sedation for patients undergoing ventilation; however, its effects on mortality and ventilator-free days have not been well studied among patients with sepsis.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether a sedation strategy with dexmedetomidine can improve clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis undergoing ventilation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Open-label, multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted at 8 intensive care units in Japan from February 2013 until January 2016 among 201 consecutive adult patients with sepsis requiring mechanical ventilation for at least 24 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive either sedation with dexmedetomidine (n = 100) or sedation without dexmedetomidine (control group; n = 101). Other agents used in both groups were fentanyl, propofol, and midazolam.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The co-primary outcomes were mortality and ventilator-free days (over a 28-day duration). Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (days 1, 2, 4, 6, 8), sedation control, occurrence of delirium and coma, intensive care unit stay duration, renal function, inflammation, and nutrition state were assessed as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 203 screened patients, 201 were randomized. The mean age was 69 years (SD, 14 years); 63% were male. Mortality at 28 days was not significantly different in the dexmedetomidine group vs the control group (19 patients [22.8%] vs 28 patients [30.8%]; hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.38-1.22; P = .20). Ventilator-free days over 28 days were not significantly different between groups (dexmedetomidine group: median, 20 [interquartile range, 5-24] days; control group: median, 18 [interquartile range, 0.5-23] days; P = .20). The dexmedetomidine group had a significantly higher rate of well-controlled sedation during mechanical ventilation (range, 17%-58% vs 20%-39%; P = .01); other outcomes were not significantly different between groups. Adverse events occurred in 8 (8%) and 3 (3%) patients in the dexmedetomidine and control groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients requiring mechanical ventilation, the use of dexmedetomidine compared with no dexmedetomidine did not result in statistically significant improvement in mortality or ventilator-free days. However, the study may have been underpowered for mortality, and additional research may be needed to evaluate this further.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01760967.

Dexmedetomidine improves gastrointestinal motility after laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

To investigate the effects of intraoperative application of dexmedetomidine (Dex) on early gastrointestinal motility after laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized double-blind investigation, 60 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer were randomly allocated to receive Dex (DEX group, n = 30) or saline (CON group, n = 30). In the DEX group, Dex was loaded (1 μg/kg) before anesthesia induction and was infused (0.3 μg/kg/h) during surgery. Time to postoperative first flatus (FFL) and first feces (FFE), and time to regular diet were recorded. Serum diamine oxidase (DAO) activity and intestinal fatty acid-binding protein (I-FABP) were detected.

RESULTS

Both the time to the FFL (44.41 ± 4.51 hours vs 61.03 ± 5.16 hours, P = 0.02) and the time to the FFE (60.67 ± 4.94 hours vs 82.50 ± 6.88 hours, P = 0.014) were significantly shorter in the DEX group than the CON group. Furthermore, the time to regular diet of the DEX group was shorter than that of the CON group (76.15 ± 4.11 hours vs 91.50 ± 5.70 hours, P = 0.037). Both DAO and I-FABP increased significantly from beginning of surgery to postoperative day 1 in the CON group (2.49 ± 0.41 ng/mL vs 4.48 ± 0.94 ng/mL for DAO, P = 0.028, 1.32 ± 0.09 ng/mL vs 2.17 ± 0.12 ng/mL for I-FABP, P = 0.045, respectively), whereas no significant change was observed in the DEX group. Furthermore, patients in the DEX group had stable hemodynamics and shorter hospital stay than those in the CON group.

CONCLUSION

Dex administration intraoperatively benefits recovery of gastrointestinal motility function after laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer with stable hemodynamics during surgery though further studies are needed to explore the mechanisms of Dex on gastrointestinal motility.

Epidural Co-Administration of Dexmedetomidine and Levobupivacaine Improves the Gastrointestinal Motility Function after Colonic Resection in Comparison to Co-Administration of Morphine and Levobupivacaine

Gastrointestinal motility may be impaired after intestinal surgery. Epidural morphine is effective in controlling postoperative pain, but can further reduce gastrointestinal motility. Here, we aimed to investigate the effects of epidural dexmedetomidine on gastrointestinal motility in patients undergoing colonic resection. Seventy-four patients undergoing colonic resection were enrolled in this clinical trial and allocated randomly to treatment with dexmedetomidine (D group) or morphine (M group). The D group received a loading dose epidural administration of 3 ml dexmedetomidine (0.5 μg kg(-1)) and then a continuous epidural administration of 80 μg dexmedetomidine in 150 ml levobupivacaine (0.125%) at 3 ml h(-1) for two days. The M group received a loading dose epidural administration of 3 ml morphine (0.03 mg kg(-1)) and then a continuous epidural administration of 4.5 mg morphine in 150 ml levobupivacaine at 3 ml h(-1) for two days. Verbal rating score (VRS), postoperative analgesic requirements, side effects related to analgesia, the time to postoperative first flatus (FFL) and first feces (FFE) were recorded. VRS and postoperative analgesic requirements were not significantly different between treatment groups. In contrast, the time to FFL and time to FFE were significant longer in M group in comparison to D group (P < 0.05). Moreover, patients in M group had a significantly higher incidence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus (P < 0.05). No patients showed neurologic deficits in either group. In comparison to morphine, epidural dexmedetomidine is safe and beneficial for the recovery of gastrointestinal motility after colonic resection when used as an adjunct with levobupivacaine for postoperative pain control.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-TRC-14004644.

Effects of proton pump inhibitors and h(2) receptor antagonists on the ileum motility

Objectives. To investigate the effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and H₂ receptor antagonists on ileum motility in rats with peritonitis and compare changes with control group rats. Methods. Peritonitis was induced by cecal ligation and puncture in 8 rats. Another of 8 rats underwent a sham operation and were accepted as controls. Twenty-four hours later after the operation, the rats were killed, and their ileum smooth muscle was excised and placed in circular muscle direction in a 10 mL organ bath. Changes in amplitude and frequency of contractions were analyzed before and after PPIs and H₂ receptor blockers. Results. PPI agents decreased the motility in a dose-dependent manner in ileum in both control and intraabdominal sepsis groups. While famotidine had no significant effect on ileum motility, ranitidine and nizatidine enhanced motility in ileum in both control and intraabdominal sepsis groups. This excitatory effect of H₂ receptor antagonists and inhibitor effects of PPIs were significantly high in control group when compared to the peritonitis group. The inhibitor effect of pantoprazole on ileum motility was significantly higher than the other two PPI agents. Conclusions. It was concluded that H₂ receptor antagonists may be more effective than PPIs for recovering the bowel motility in the intraabdominal sepsis situation.