Cisapride in the control of symptoms in infants with gastroesophageal reflux: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Cisapride for gastro-oesophageal reflux and peptic oesophagitis. Gaviscon and Carobel compared with cisapride in gastro-oesophageal reflux. Does cisapride influence cardiac rhythm? Results of a United States multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled pediatric study. Effect of cisapride on excessive regurgitation in infants. Cisapride in pediatric gastroesophageal reflux. Cisapride decreases prolonged episodes of reflux in infants.
To evaluate the efficacy of cisapride in the treatment of uncomplicated gastroesophageal reflux in children younger than 36 months of age.
                A total of 95 patients satisfied the entry criteria and were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with either cisapride (n = 50), 0.2 mg/kg 4 times daily, or placebo (n = 45) for 2 weeks. At the end of the 2-week treatment period, symptom diary and parental evaluation with repeat 24-hour pH study were performed.
                Sixty-eight patients completed the trial (38 in the cisapride group and 30 in the placebo group). There were no significant differences in the symptoms of crying, vomiting, or gagging; the overall symptom intensity score; or parental global evaluations. There was a significant difference (P <.03) in the percent time pH <4, the number of reflux episodes lasting more than 5 minutes, and the duration of the longest episode. No significant difference was demonstrated for the number of episodes with pH <4 or the reflux score.
                Cisapride was no better than placebo for relief of symptoms in children with uncomplicated gastroesophageal reflux. A beneficial effect was demonstrated in the cisapride group in relation to the measured parameters for esophageal acid exposure time. Twenty children (age range 75 days-47 months) with reflux oesophagitis entered a random double blind trial in which they received either Cisapride (Janssen Pharmaceutical Ltd), a new prokinetic agent, or an identical placebo syrup. Diagnosis of gastro-oesophageal reflux was made by measurement of intraluminal oesophageal pH combined with manometry. Oesophagitis was assessed in all patients by histological examination of mucosal specimens taken during oesophagogastroduodenoscopy. Manometry, pH test, and endoscopy with biopsy examination were repeated at the end of the treatment period. Seventeen patients completed the trial, eight of whom were taking the drug and nine the placebo. Mean total clinical score and post-prandial reflux time (% of reflux) significantly improved in patients in the group given Cisapride but not in the group given placebo. Furthermore, there was a significant improvement of the histological oesophagitis score only in the children in the group given Cisapride, whereas placebo was ineffective. It is concluded that Cisapride is a useful agent both for the relief of symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux and for the healing of peptic oesophagitis in infancy. We compared the efficacy of the prokinetic agent cisapride with that of Gaviscon (an alginate/alkaline compound) plus Carobel (carob seed flour) in the treatment of gastrooesophageal reflux (GOR). Fifty infants with confirmed GOR received either oral cisapride (0.8 mg/kg/day) or Gaviscon plus Carobel for one month in a randomised, parallel group study. Parental evaluations, diary scores, and 24 hour lower oesophageal pH recordings before and at the end of each treatment were compared. In the cisapride group 14/26 (53%) were considered better by their parents compared with 19/24 (79%) of those who received Gaviscon plus Carobel. Diary scores, range (0.00-1.00), improved in both groups with the median change being greater in the Gaviscon plus Carobel group (-0.21) than the cisapride group (-0.15). Five of 17 pH variables had significantly improved from baseline in infants who had received cisapride compared with 11/17 in those receiving Gaviscon plus Carobel. However, unpaired analysis of diary and pH data showed no significant differences between the two groups. We conclude that first line treatment of GOR with cisapride is no more effective than conventional treatment with Gaviscon plus Carobel. Major concerns about serious cardiac side effects underlie the recent decision by the FDA and Janssen Pharmaceutica (Titusville, NJ) to make cisapride available only through a limited access program. Concerns have grown despite the fact that most instances of prolonged QTc and other ventricular arrhythmias occurred while the drug was used concomitantly with contraindicated drugs. This study sought to analyze electrocardiograms (ECGs) from a multicenter pediatric study and to identify abnormalities in QTc interval associated with cisapride use.
                Children between 6 months and 4 years of age were enrolled if they manifested symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux not responding to medical therapy for at least 6 weeks. In 49 subjects, ECGs obtained before and after randomization to receive 0.2 mg/kg dose three times daily or placebo were reviewed independently and blindly by two pediatric cardiologists. Placebo and active drug groups were compared for QTc and for change in QTc from baseline values after 3 to 8 weeks of treatment.
                Mean QTc among patients taking the drug was 408+/-18 ms. None was higher than 450 ms. Change between baseline and subsequent QTc at 3 to 8 weeks of treatment was 2+/-20 ms.
                In our study group of children without underlying cardiac disease or electrolyte imbalance, cisapride was found to have no significant effect on cardiac electrical function compared with placebo. These results are consistent with the drug's record of exceedingly infrequent cardiac events. Because the availability of this prokinetic is threatened, its safety and the safety and efficacy of alternative treatment options (including surgery) should be studied further. The relevance of the upper gastrointestinal motility-stimulating effects of cisapride for the treatment of excessive regurgitation and vomiting in infants was studied in 137 patients aged less than 1 year. They were treated with placebo or with cisapride, 0.1 to 0.2 mg/kg three times daily, for up to four weeks. In a dose-dependent fashion, cisapride significantly reduced the frequency and severity of regurgitation: after four weeks of treatment at 0.15 to 0.2 mg/kg, only about 20% of infants still had moderate or severe regurgitation, compared with about two thirds of those treated with placebo. Although only a few patients were followed up, the duration of treatment (four weeks) appeared to be long enough to minimize relapse. Side effects were limited to phenomena indicative of stimulated bowel motility. Gastroesophageal reflux is a common condition that in infants may lead to serious complication. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of oral cisapride suspension in the treatment of children 6 weeks to 2 years old with daily regurgitant reflux.
                A randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted at three study sites. After a 1 week baseline assessment, 45 infants 6 weeks to 2 years old were randomized to a double-blind trial in which they received a 6 week course of cisapride (0.2 mg/kg q6h) or a placebo suspension. Efficacy was assessed with 24 hour esophageal pH monitoring, esophageal manometry, and esophageal biopsy before and after the treatment period. A diary of regurgitation frequency and severity was kept by the parents. Safety was assessed by adverse event monitoring and standard laboratory measurements.
                Compared with placebo, cisapride significantly (p < 0.05) reduced the mean duration of upright and supine reflux episodes. Compared to baseline, cisapride significantly reduced the mean duration of the longest reflux episode, and placebo increased the mean number of reflux episodes longer than 5 minutes. Cisapride was not significantly different from placebo for the following mean measurements: percent of total time pH < 4, number of reflux episodes, lower esophageal sphincter pressure, swallow pressure, regurgitation frequency or global evaluation scores.
                Cisapride is a safe, well tolerated prokinetic agent that improves the esophageal clearance of refluxed gastric acid in children under the age of 2 years. Twenty-nine infants (2-4 months old), with pathological gastroesophageal reflux assessed by 24-h esophageal pH monitoring, were studied. Cisapride or placebo was randomly added to positional treatment, prone-antiTrendelenburg position, which was applied to all infants. The pH monitoring was repeated after 13-16 days of treatment and revealed a significant improvement in both groups for most parameters. But the number of reflux episodes lasting longer than 5 min and the total number of reflux episodes had not decreased significantly in the placebo group. Only in the number of reflux episodes lasting longer than 5 min was improvement during treatment significantly greater in the cisapride group. This suggests cisapride both prevented reflux and improved esophageal clearance. These results suggest that in addition to other therapeutic measurements, such as positional treatment (which was previously demonstrated to be effective in this age group), cisapride might be of benefit in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
We found no clear evidence that cisapride reduces symptoms of GOR. Due to reports of fatal cardiac arrhythmias or sudden death, from July 2000 in the USA and Europe cisapride was restricted to a limited access programme supervised by a paediatric gastrologist.