DOI
https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v6i1.357Abstract
PICO question
In dogs presenting with gastrointestinal (GI) hypomotility is ranitidine administration (any route) beneficial in improving GI motility?
Clinical bottom line
Category of research question
Treatment
The number and type of study designs reviewed
One prospective controlled clinical trial and five experimental crossover studies
Strength of evidence
Weak
Outcomes reported
The vast majority of the evidence investigating ranitidine as a prokinetic has been carried out in experimental settings both in vivo with healthy conscious and anaesthetised dogs and in vitro. Under these circumstances ranitidine has shown some prokinetic properties. However, it is difficult to translate these results into reliable clinical recommendations, as the doses mentioned in these studies are often higher than the ones clinically recommended and healthy canine patients might respond differently to clinically affected ones
Conclusion
Although in experimental settings ranitidine has shown some prokinetic activities, no reliable clinical recommendations can be drawn from the appraised studies. There is a need of prospective clinical trials evaluating the administration of ranitidine to dogs presenting with GI hypomotility. Until further relevant studies become available, the efficacy of ranitidine administration as a prokinetic agent in dogs with GI hypomotility remains uncertain
How to apply this evidence in practice
The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources.
Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
References
Bertaccini, G., Coruzzi, G. & Poli, E. (1985). ‘Histamine H2 receptor antagonists may modify intestinal motility independently of their primary action on the H2 receptors’. Pharmacological Research Communications. 17(3), 241–254. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-6989(85)90099-2
Favarato, E.S., Souza, M.V., Costa, P.R.S., Favarato, L.S.C., Nehme, R.C., Monteiro, B.S. & Bonfá, L.P. (2012). ‘Evaluation of metoclopramide and ranitidine on the prevention of gastroesophageal reflux episodes in anesthetized dogs’. Research in Veterinary Science. 93(1), 466–467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2011.07.027
Fioramonti, J., Soldani, G., Honde, C. & Bueno, L. (1984). ‘Effects of ranitidine and oxmetidine on gastrointestinal motility in conscious dog’. Agents and Actions. 15(3–4):260–263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01972359
Hall, J.A. (2008). ‘Gastric motility disorders & prokinetic therapies in small animals’. Proceedings ACVIM Forum, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 4–7 June, 2008. Veterinary Proceedings. 670–672.
Hall, J.A. & Washabau, R.J. (1999). ’Diagnosis and treatment of gastric motility disorders.’ Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice. 29(2), 377–395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-5616(99)50027-2
Kishibayashi, N., Tomaru, A., Ichikawa, S., Kitazawa, T. & Shuto, K. (1994). ‘Enhancement by KW-5092, a novel gastroprokinetic agent, of the gastrointestinal motor activity in dogs.’ Japanese Journal of Pharmacology. 65(2), 131–142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-5198(19)35772-5
Lidbury, J.A., Suchodolski, J.S., Ivanek, R. & Steiner, J.M. (2012). ‘Assessment of the variation associated with repeated measurement of gastrointestinal transit times and assessment of the effect of oral ranitidine on gastrointestinal transit times using a wireless motility capsule system in dogs’. Veterinary Medicine International. 2012:Article ID 938417. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/938417
Luckey, A., Livingston, E. & Taché, Y. (2003). ‘Mechanisms and Treatment of Postoperative Ileus’. Arch Surg. 138(2):206–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.138.2.206
Marks, S.L., Kook, P.H., Papich, M.G., Tolbert, M.K. & Willard, M.D. (2018). ‘ACVIM consensus statement: Support for rational administration of gastrointestinal protectants to dogs and cats.’ Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine. 32(6), 1823–1840. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jvim.15337
Mizumoto, A., Fujimura, M., Iwanaga, Y., Miyashita, N., Yoshida, N., Kondo, Y. & Itoh, Z. (1990). ‘Anticholinesterase activity of histamine H2-receptor antagonists in the dog; their possible role in gastric motor activity’. Neurogastroenterology and Motility. 2(4), 273–280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2982.1990.tb00035.x
Smout, A.J., Bogaard, J.W., Grade, A.C., ten Thije, O.J., Akkermans, L.M. & Wittebol, P. (1985). ‘Effects of cisapride, a new gastrointestinal prokinetic substance, on interdigestive and postprandial motor activity of the distal oesophagus in man’. Gut. 26(3), 246–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.26.3.246
Whitehead, K., Cortes, Y. & Eirmann, L. (2016). ’Gastrointestinal dysmotility disorders in critically ill dogs and cats’. Journal of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care. 26(2), 234–253. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.12449
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Lara Brunori
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Veterinary Evidence uses the Creative Commons copyright Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. That means users are free to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially - with the appropriate citation.
