Promotion of Regular Oesophageal Motility to Prevent Regurgitation and Enhance Nutrition Intake in Long-Stay ICU Patients. A Multicenter, Phase II, Sham-Controlled, Randomized Trial: The PROPEL Study

Crit Care Med. 2020 Mar;48(3):e219-e226. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004176.

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of esophageal stimulation on nutritional adequacy in critically ill patients at risk for enteral feeding intolerance.

Design: A multicenter randomized sham-controlled clinical trial.

Setting: Twelve ICUs in Canada.

Patients: We included mechanically ventilated ICU patients who were given moderate-to-high doses of opioids and expected to remain alive and ventilated for an additional 48 hours and who were receiving enteral nutrition or expected to start imminently.

Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to esophageal stimulation via an esophageal stimulating catheter (E-Motion Tube; E-Motion Medical, Tel Aviv, Israel) or sham treatment. All patients were fed via these catheters using a standardized feeding protocol.

Measurements and main results: The co-primary outcomes were proportion of caloric and protein prescription received enterally over the initial 7 days following randomization. Among 159 patients randomized, the modified intention-to-treat analysis included 155 patients: 73 patients in the active treatment group and 82 in the sham treatment group. Over the 7-day study period, the percent of prescribed caloric intake (± SE) received by the enteral route was 64% ± 2 in the active group and 65% ± 2 in sham patients for calories (difference, -1; 95% CI, -8 to 6; p = 0.74). For protein, it was 57% ± 3 in the active group and 60% ± 3 in the sham group (difference, -3; 95% CI, -10 to 3; p = 0.30). Compared to the sham group, there were more serious adverse events reported in the active treatment group (13 vs 6; p = 0.053). Clinically important arrhythmias were detected by Holter monitoring in 36 out of 70 (51%) in the active group versus 22 out of 76 (29%) in the sham group (p = 0.006).

Conclusions: Esophageal stimulation via a special feeding catheter did not improve nutritional adequacy and was associated with increase risk of harm in critically ill patients.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial, Phase II
  • Multicenter Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Critical Illness / therapy*
  • Electric Stimulation Therapy / methods*
  • Enteral Nutrition / methods*
  • Esophagus / physiology*
  • Female
  • Gastrointestinal Motility / physiology*
  • Humans
  • Intensive Care Units
  • Kaplan-Meier Estimate
  • Laryngopharyngeal Reflux / prevention & control*
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Nutritional Status
  • Respiration, Artificial
  • Young Adult