Hawley Philippa Helen, Byeon Jai Jun
Department of Palliative Care, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
J Palliat Med. 2008 May;11(4):575-81. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2007.0178.
BACKGROUND: Constipation is a common and distressing condition in patients with cancer, especially those taking opioid analgesics. Many institutions prevent and treat constipation with titrated laxatives, which is known as a bowel protocol. An effective and well-tolerated bowel protocol is a very important component of cancer care, and there is little evidence on which to base selection of the most appropriate agents. This study compares a protocol of the stimulant laxative sennosides alone with a protocol of sennosides plus the stool softener docusate, in hospitalized patients at an oncology center. The docusate-containing protocol had an initial docusate-only step for patients not taking opioids, and four to six 100-mg capsules of docusate sodium in addition to the sennosides for the rest of the protocol. METHODS: Thirty patients received the sennosides-only (S) protocol and 30 the sennosides plus docusate (DS) protocol. The efficacy and adverse effects of the protocols were monitored for 5-12 days. The two protocols were used sequentially, creating two cohorts, one on each protocol. Eighty percent of patients were taking oral opioids and 72% were admitted for symptom control/supportive care. RESULTS: Over a total of 488 days of observation it was found that the S protocol produced more bowel movements than the DS protocol, and in the symptom control/supportive care patients this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). In the S group admitted for symptom control/supportive care 62.5% had a bowel movement more than 50% of days, as compared with 32% in those receiving the DS protocol. Fifty-seven percent of the DS group required additional interventions (lactulose, suppositories or enemas) compared to 40% in the S group. Cramps were reported equally by 3 (10%) patients in each group. Eight patients (27%) experienced diarrhea in the S group compared to 4 (13%) in the DS group. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of the initial docusate-only step and adding docusate 400-600 mg/d to the sennosides did not reduce bowel cramps, and was less effective in inducing laxation than the sennosides-only protocol. Further research into the appropriate use of docusate and into the details of bowel protocol design are required.
背景:便秘是癌症患者常见且令人苦恼的病症,尤其是那些服用阿片类镇痛药的患者。许多机构使用滴定缓泻剂预防和治疗便秘,这被称为肠道方案。有效的且耐受性良好的肠道方案是癌症护理的一个非常重要的组成部分,而关于选择最合适药物的依据几乎没有证据。本研究在一家肿瘤中心的住院患者中,比较了单独使用刺激性缓泻剂番泻苷的方案与番泻苷加粪便软化剂多库酯的方案。含多库酯的方案对于未服用阿片类药物的患者有一个仅使用多库酯的初始步骤,在方案的其余阶段除了番泻苷外还使用四至六粒100毫克的多库酯钠胶囊。 方法:30例患者接受仅使用番泻苷(S)的方案,30例接受番泻苷加多库酯(DS)的方案。对方案的疗效和不良反应进行5至12天的监测。这两种方案依次使用,形成两个队列,每个队列采用一种方案。80%的患者正在服用口服阿片类药物,72%的患者因症状控制/支持性护理入院。 结果:在总共488天的观察期内发现,S方案比DS方案产生更多的排便次数,并且在症状控制/支持性护理患者中,这种差异具有统计学意义(p<0.05)。在因症状控制/支持性护理入院的S组中,62.5%的患者超过50%的天数有排便,而接受DS方案的患者中这一比例为32%。DS组57%的患者需要额外干预(乳果糖、栓剂或灌肠),而S组为40%。每组各有3例(10%)患者报告有痉挛。S组有8例(27%)患者出现腹泻,而DS组有4例(13%)。 结论:增加仅使用多库酯的初始步骤以及在番泻苷基础上加用400 - 600毫克/天的多库酯并不能减少肠道痉挛,并且在诱导通便方面比仅使用番泻苷的方案效果更差。需要进一步研究多库酯的恰当使用以及肠道方案设计的细节。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2012-8-11
J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2022-3
Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2019-12-19
Support Care Cancer. 2019-7-18
J Adv Pract Oncol. 2017-3
Clin Geriatr Med. 2016-2
J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2014-8
J Hosp Med. 2013-12
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2013-8