Logo

Prophylactic Neostigmine Infusion After Radical Cystectomy; Phase I Clinical Trial

Author(s):
Mohammad SoleimaniMohammad SoleimaniMohammad Soleimani ORCID1, Navid MasoumiNavid MasoumiNavid Masoumi ORCID2, Amir Alinejad KhorramAmir Alinejad KhorramAmir Alinejad Khorram ORCID3, Ahmad AmiriAhmad Amiri2, Mehran MoghimianMehran Moghimian2, Mostafa FarajpourMostafa FarajpourMostafa Farajpour ORCID2, Farzad AllamehFarzad AllamehFarzad Allameh ORCID4,*
1Men's Health and Reproductive Health Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2Department of Urology, Shahid Modarres Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3Department of Urology, Shohada-e-Tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4Laser Application in Medical Sciences Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


International Journal of Cancer Management:Vol. 18, issue 1; e157970
Published online:Apr 03, 2025
Article type:Research Article
Received:Nov 18, 2024
Accepted:Jan 01, 2025
How to Cite:Mohammad SoleimaniNavid MasoumiAmir Alinejad KhorramAhmad AmiriMehran MoghimianMostafa FarajpourFarzad Allamehet al.Prophylactic Neostigmine Infusion After Radical Cystectomy; Phase I Clinical Trial.Int J Cancer Manag.18(1):e157970.https://doi.org/10.5812/ijcm-157970.

Abstract

Background:

Postoperative ileus (POI) occurs in 10% to 30% of patients following abdominal surgeries, leading to prolonged hospitalization, increased complications, and elevated treatment costs. Various strategies have been proposed to prevent POI and its associated complications. Neostigmine, an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, has demonstrated effectiveness in treating acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (Ogilvie's syndrome). However, concerns exist regarding its use following surgeries that involve intestinal manipulation, and its impact on reducing the incidence of POI after radical cystectomy and urinary diversion has not been adequately investigated.

Objectives:

This study aims at assessing the safety of neostigmine administration after radical cystectomy and urinary diversion, marking the first phase of a clinical trial.

Methods:

Twenty-four hours after radical cystectomy, 1 mg of neostigmine was administered intravenously to the selected group of patients. Drug-related complications were carefully monitored.

Results:

A total of 25 patients, with an average age of 63.20 ± 8.85 years, were included in the study. One patient expired 5 days post-surgery due to sepsis related to intra-abdominal abscess formation without intestinal leakage. In the remaining patients, drug-related complications were mild and self-limited.

Conclusions:

This study indicates that intravenous administration of 1 mg of neostigmine is relatively safe for patients undergoing radical cystectomy. Future phases of the clinical trial should focus on evaluating the efficacy of neostigmine in preventing POI following radical cystectomy.

1. Background

Postoperative ileus (POI) is characterized by an abnormal pattern of gastrointestinal motility following surgical procedures, occurring in the absence of mechanical obstruction. Clinically, POI manifests as symptoms such as abdominal distention, lack of stool passage, and intolerance to oral intake. Although POI is generally considered an uncomplicated sequel in most cases, it can lead to increased complications, higher healthcare costs, and prolonged hospital stays (1, 2). The incidence of POI after abdominal surgery ranges from 10% to 30% (3). When POI persists for more than 3 to 7 days, it is classified as "prolonged" or "pathologic" POI, which may result in serious complications (4). Patients undergoing radical cystectomy and urinary diversion are particularly susceptible to POI, influenced by factors such as intestinal resection, inflammatory mediators, opioid use, and electrolyte imbalances (5, 6).

To prevent POI and mitigate its associated complications, several strategies have been implemented. These strategies include the adoption of "enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)" protocols, as well as the utilization of specific pharmaceutical therapies (1, 7). Neostigmine, an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, is traditionally used in managing acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, also known as Ogilvie's syndrome (8-10). The most significant side effects of neostigmine are those related to its cholinergic activity. These side effects can include bradyarrhythmia, bronchospasm, miosis, abdominal cramps, increased secretions, vomiting, and nausea (11). Notably, neostigmine is contraindicated in individuals with hypersensitivity to the drug, as well as in cases of peritonitis or any mechanical obstruction in the gastrointestinal or urinary tract (9, 12). Given the prohibition of this medication in cases of documented intestinal obstruction, its use following gastrointestinal surgeries raises concerns (9).

2. Objectives

This study aims at investigating the safety of neostigmine administration after radical cystectomy and urinary diversion by designing the first phase of a clinical trial.

3. Methods

3.1. Study Design

This study represents the first phase of a clinical trial aimed at investigating the safety of postoperative administration of neostigmine after radical cystectomy on the incidence of POI. In this phase, we will evaluate the side effects and related complications associated with administering 1 mg of neostigmine intravenously in a selected group of patients following radical cystectomy.

3.2. Patient Selection

Patients diagnosed with bladder cancer and scheduled for radical cystectomy from April 2023 to May 2024 at Shahid Modarres Hospital were evaluated for inclusion in the study. During the screening period, 38 patients were assessed, and after excluding those who did not meet the criteria, 25 patients were ultimately included in the study.

3.2.1. Inclusion Criteria

- Candidates for radical cystectomy due to muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

- Undergoing radical cystectomy with urinary diversion involving intestinal and colonic reconstruction (e.g., ileal conduit, orthotopic ileal or sigmoid pouch, etc.).

3.2.2. Exclusion Criteria

- Contraindications to neostigmine administration, including hypersensitivity to neostigmine, chronic kidney disease, reactive airway disease, uncontrolled arrhythmias, and recent myocardial infarction.

3.3. Data Collection

Twenty-four hours after radical cystectomy, 1 mg of neostigmine was ordered for the selected patients. Intravenous infusion administration was supervised by a urological oncology fellow and the patients were monitored; also, a nurse conducted vital sign examinations every 10 minutes during infusion and then every hour during the next 24 hours and then every 3 hours during the rest days of the hospitalization period. Patients were observed for any side effects and complications related to neostigmine administration including blurred vision, headache, increased sweating, nausea, chest pain or discomfort, diarrhea or any intestinal anastomosis complication, hives, muscle cramps and spasms, confusion, cough or increase of respiratory secretion, difficulty in moving, dysphagia, xerostomia, loss of consciousness, abdominal pain, fainting, halos around lights, itching, muscle pain or stiffness, difficult or labored breathing, disturbed color perception, dizziness, double vision, drowsiness. Additionally, the following outcomes were recorded: Time taken to normalize bowel sounds, time to first passage of gas, time to first defecation, fluid tolerance, and solid food tolerance. All data were meticulously recorded and analyzed to assess the effects of the intervention.

3.4. Ethical Statement

This research was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, with approval number IR.SBMU.LASER.REC.1402.025. Potential risks and benefits were explained to all patients. Also, written informed consent was obtained from all the patients. The information obtained from the patients was kept confidential throughout the survey.

4. Results

A total of 25 patients participated in our study. Participants' characteristics are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.Participants’ Characteristics
VariablesMean ± SD or No. (%)
Age (y)63.20 ± 8.85
Gender
Male21 (84)
Female4 (16)
Duration of surgery (min)251.60 ± 69.02
Method of urinary diversion
Ileal conduit10 (40)
Orthotopic ileal pouch8 (32)
Orthotopic sigmoid pouch7 (28)

Participants’ Characteristics

Due to the small sample size, we did not have any missing data or follow-up information. The average time to auscultation of normal bowel sounds following surgery was 28.52 ± 11.86 hours. The average times for the first occurrences of various recovery milestones post-surgery were as follows: (A) Gas passage: 39.92 ± 16.35 hours; (B) defecation: 61.80 ± 24.23 hours; (C) fluid tolerance: 44.48 ± 30.81 hours; (D) solid food tolerance: 67.28 ± 34.90 hours.

We closely monitored the patients for any side effects and complications related to neostigmine administration. Unfortunately, one patient expired 5 days post-surgery and 4 days after infusion of neostigmine. In the autopsy report, the death etiology was explained due to sepsis related to intra-abdominal abscess formation without intestinal leakage. In the remaining 24 patients, side effects were mild and self-limited, with no reports of cardiovascular complications. Additionally, there were no cases of peritonitis or leaks from intestinal anastomosis. Details regarding side effects associated with neostigmine are presented in Table 2.

Table 2.Details of Side Effects Associated with Neostigmine Administration
VariablesPatients a
Headache2 (8)
Abdominal cramps3 (12)
Vomiting and nausea2 (8)
Increased respiratory secretions1 (4)

Details of Side Effects Associated with Neostigmine Administration

Early therapeutic interventions required due to neostigmine administration were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo grading system, as shown in Table 3. None of the patients experienced severe complications (grade IV or V). Two patients required anti-nausea medication (grade I), and two others required analgesics for headache relief (also grade I).

Table 3.Clavien-Dindo Classification of Early Therapeutic Interventions
GradePatients a
Grade I4 (16)
Grade II0 (0)
Grade III a0 (0)
Grade III b0 (0)
Grade IV a0 (0)
Grade IV b0 (0)
Grade V0 (0)

Clavien-Dindo Classification of Early Therapeutic Interventions

5. Discussion

This study intended to investigate the safety of administering neostigmine following radical cystectomy surgery with intestinal anastomosis, focusing on associated side effects and complications. We monitored 25 patients who received neostigmine postoperatively. While one patient tragically passed away 5 days after surgery, it is important to note that this complication is unlikely to be directly related to the prescribed dose of 1 mg IV of neostigmine. Among the remaining 24 patients, no serious complications were reported. The side effects observed were mild and self-limited, suggesting that neostigmine can be administered safely in this context.

The POI is a common complication following abdominal surgeries, with a reported prevalence ranging from 10% to 30% (13). Researchers identify several predisposing factors for the occurrence of POI, including tissue trauma, intestinal manipulation, inflammation, fluid overload, and the use of opioid analgesics (13, 14). This condition is characterized by intestinal paralysis, leading to the accumulation of intestinal contents. The POI is characterized by intestinal paralysis, which leads to the accumulation of intestinal contents. Clinical signs of POI include abdominal pain and distension, nausea and vomiting, feeding intolerance, and cessation of flatus and defecation. These symptoms arise from the buildup of liquid and gas in the gastrointestinal tract (15, 16).

The implications of POI extend beyond patient discomfort; it significantly increases the length of hospitalization and treatment costs. In the United States, annual costs associated with POI have been estimated to reach as high as 1.47$ billion, creating a significant financial strain on society (17). Additionally, POI is associated with a heightened risk of more serious complications, including pulmonary embolism, pulmonary aspiration, electrolyte imbalance, wound dehiscence, and even sepsis (3, 18, 19).

Given the potential complications associated with POI, researchers have focused on identifying effective prevention and treatment strategies. In some medical centers, the routine use of nasogastric tubes following abdominal surgeries is common. However, studies suggest that prophylactic nasogastric decompression does not significantly alleviate symptoms associated with POI; its use is recommended only for selected patients (20). Conversely, emerging evidence indicates that chewing gum may effectively reduce the duration of ileus after elective surgeries (21, 22). A recent randomized controlled trial by Muwel et al. further demonstrated that chewing gum can reduce POI following surgery for gastroduodenal perforation peritonitis (23).

Additionally, the effects of coffee and caffeinated drinks on POI are being explored and debated. A meta-analysis by Yang et al. reported that coffee or caffeine consumption after elective colorectal surgeries can aid in the prevention and treatment of POI (24). While the impact of coffee on bowel movements has been confirmed in other studies (25, 26), some research presents conflicting results. For instance, one randomized controlled trial found that coffee consumption does not significantly improve bowel function following minimally invasive surgeries (27). Furthermore, pharmacological prophylaxis for POI has been investigated; a randomized controlled trial by Delaney et al. found that the administration of alvimopan significantly reduced the incidence of POI after bowel resection (28).

Neostigmine is an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor that has demonstrated beneficial effects in treating acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, also known as Ogilvie's syndrome (10). In this study, we aimed at investigating the safety of neostigmine administration following radical cystectomy. According to the results, this study suggests the second phase of a clinical trial be designed to evaluate the effect of prophylactic neostigmine on the occurrence of POI after radical cystectomy. The main limitation of our study was the relatively small sample size. The limited number of participating patients decreases the generalizability of our results. Future multicenter studies with larger sample sizes and greater diversity in race and gender will help produce more widely applicable findings.

Footnotes

References

  • 1.
    Khawaja ZH, Gendia A, Adnan N, Ahmed J. Prevention and Management of Postoperative Ileus: A Review of Current Practice. Cureus. 2022;14(2). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.22652.
  • 2.
    Willis MA, Toews I, Soltau SL, Kalff JC, Meerpohl JJ, Vilz TO. Preoperative combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation for preventing complications in elective colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;2(2). CD014909. [PubMed ID: 36748942]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC9908065]. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014909.pub2.
  • 3.
    Venara A, Neunlist M, Slim K, Barbieux J, Colas PA, Hamy A, et al. Postoperative ileus: Pathophysiology, incidence, and prevention. J Visc Surg. 2016;153(6):439-46. [PubMed ID: 27666979]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2016.08.010.
  • 4.
    Wolthuis AM, Bislenghi G, Fieuws S, de Buck van Overstraeten A, Boeckxstaens G, D'Hoore A. Incidence of prolonged postoperative ileus after colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2016;18(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13210.
  • 5.
    Sathianathen NJ, Kalapara A, Frydenberg M, Lawrentschuk N, Weight CJ, Parekh D, et al. Robotic Assisted Radical Cystectomy vs Open Radical Cystectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol. 2019;201(4):715-20. [PubMed ID: 30321551]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.10.006.
  • 6.
    Udovicich C, Perera M, Huq M, Wong LM, Lenaghan D. Hospital volume and perioperative outcomes for radical cystectomy: a population study. BJU Int. 2017;119 Suppl 5:26-32. [PubMed ID: 28544301]. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13827.
  • 7.
    Boitano TKL, Smith HJ, Rushton T, Johnston MC, Lawson P, Leath C3, et al. Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol on gastrointestinal function in gynecologic oncology patients undergoing laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2018;151(2):282-6. [PubMed ID: 30244961]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.09.009.
  • 8.
    McNamara R, Mihalakis MJ. Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction: rapid correction with neostigmine in the emergency department. J Emerg Med. 2008;35(2):167-70. [PubMed ID: 18242923]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.06.043.
  • 9.
    Liu JJ, Venkatesh V, Gao J, Adler E, Brenner DM. Efficacy and Safety of Neostigmine and Decompressive Colonoscopy for Acute Colonic Pseudo-Obstruction: A Single-Center Analysis. Gastroenterol Res. 2021;14(3):157-64. [PubMed ID: 34267830]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC8256896]. https://doi.org/10.14740/gr1394.
  • 10.
    Williamson S, Muller A, Butts CA, Geng TA, Ong AW. Acute Colonic Pseudo-obstruction: Colonoscopy Versus Neostigmine First? J Surg Res. 2023;288:38-42. [PubMed ID: 36948031]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2023.02.023.
  • 11.
    Li G, Freundlich RE, Gupta RK, Hayhurst CJ, Le CH, Martin BJ, et al. Postoperative Pulmonary Complications' Association with Sugammadex versus Neostigmine: A Retrospective Registry Analysis. Anesthesiology. 2021;134(6):862-73. [PubMed ID: 33730169]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC8114582]. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000003735.
  • 12.
    St John PH, Radcliffe AG. Contraindication for the use of neostigmine in colonic pseudo-obstruction. Br J Surg. 1997;84(10):1481-2. [PubMed ID: 9361625]. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800841044.
  • 13.
    Zhou Y, Yin ZH, Sun MS, Wang YY, Yang C, Li SH, et al. Global research trends in postoperative ileus from 2011 to 2023: A scientometric study. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024;16(9):3020-31. [PubMed ID: 39351552]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC11438810]. https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v16.i9.3020.
  • 14.
    Bragg D, El-Sharkawy AM, Psaltis E, Maxwell-Armstrong CA, Lobo DN. Postoperative ileus: Recent developments in pathophysiology and management. Clin Nutr. 2015;34(3):367-76. [PubMed ID: 25819420]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2015.01.016.
  • 15.
    Vilz TO, Stoffels B, Strassburg C, Schild HH, Kalff JC. Ileus in Adults. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2017;114(29-30):508-18. [PubMed ID: 28818187]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC5569564]. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2017.0508.
  • 16.
    Mazzotta E, Villalobos-Hernandez EC, Fiorda-Diaz J, Harzman A, Christofi FL. Postoperative Ileus and Postoperative Gastrointestinal Tract Dysfunction: Pathogenic Mechanisms and Novel Treatment Strategies Beyond Colorectal Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols. Front Pharmacol. 2020;11:583422. [PubMed ID: 33390950]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7774512]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2020.583422.
  • 17.
    Kraft MD. Methylnaltrexone, a new peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonist being evaluated for the treatment of postoperative ileus. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2008;17(9):1365-77. [PubMed ID: 18694369]. https://doi.org/10.1517/13543784.17.9.1365.
  • 18.
    van Bree SH, Nemethova A, Cailotto C, Gomez-Pinilla PJ, Matteoli G, Boeckxstaens GE. New therapeutic strategies for postoperative ileus. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;9(11):675-83. [PubMed ID: 22801725]. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrgastro.2012.134.
  • 19.
    Zhou Y, Yin Z, Sun M, Wang Y, Yang C, Li S, et al. Global research trends in postoperative ileus from 2011 to 2023: A Scientometric study. medRxiv. 2024;Preprint. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.12.24301260.
  • 20.
    Nelson R, Tse B, Edwards S. Systematic review of prophylactic nasogastric decompression after abdominal operations. Br J Surg. 2005;92(6):673-80. [PubMed ID: 15912492]. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.5090.
  • 21.
    Muhumuza J, Molen SF, Mauricio W, La O, Atumanyire J, Godefroy NB, et al. Effect of Chewing Gum on Duration of Postoperative Ileus Following Laparotomy for Gastroduodenal Perforations: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. Int J Surg Protoc. 2023;27(1):9-17. [PubMed ID: 36818423]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC9912851]. https://doi.org/10.29337/ijsp.188.
  • 22.
    Sammut R, Trapani J, Deguara J, Ravasi V. The effect of gum chewing on postoperative ileus in open colorectal surgery patients: A review. J Perioper Pract. 2021;31(4):132-9. [PubMed ID: 32301386]. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750458920917015.
  • 23.
    Muwel S, Suryawanshi S, Damde HK, Mishra A, Yadav SK, Sharma D. Effect of chewing gum in reducing postoperative ileus after gastroduodenal perforation peritonitis surgery: A prospective randomised controlled trial. Tropical Doctor. 2023;Preprint. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3416064/v1.
  • 24.
    Yang TW, Wang CC, Sung WW, Ting WC, Lin CC, Tsai MC. The effect of coffee/caffeine on postoperative ileus following elective colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2022;37(3):623-30. [PubMed ID: 34993568]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC8885519]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-021-04086-3.
  • 25.
    Sinz S, Warschkow R, Tarantino I, Steffen T. Gum Chewing and Coffee Consumption but not Caffeine Intake Improve Bowel Function after Gastrointestinal Surgery: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2023;27(8):1730-45. [PubMed ID: 37277676]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC10412511]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-023-05702-z.
  • 26.
    Parnasa SY, Marom G, Bdolah-Abram T, Gefen R, Luques L, Michael S, et al. Does caffeine enhance bowel recovery after elective colorectal resection? A prospective double-blinded randomized clinical trial. Tech Coloproctol. 2021;25(7):831-9. [PubMed ID: 33900493]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02450-7.
  • 27.
    Nasseri Y, Kasheri E, Oka K, Zhu R, Smiley A, Cohen J, et al. Does coffee affect bowel recovery following minimally invasive colorectal operations? A three-armed randomized controlled trial. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2023;38(1):199. [PubMed ID: 37470901]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-023-04494-7.
  • 28.
    Delaney CP, Wolff BG, Viscusi ER, Senagore AJ, Fort JG, Du W, et al. Alvimopan, for postoperative ileus following bowel resection: a pooled analysis of phase III studies. Ann Surg. 2007;245(3):355-63. [PubMed ID: 17435541]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC1877012]. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000232538.72458.93.
comments

Leave a comment here


Crossmark
Crossmark
Checking
Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Purchasing Reprints

  • Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) handles bulk orders for article reprints for Brieflands. To place an order for reprints, please click here (   https://www.copyright.com/landing/reprintsinquiryform/ ). Clicking this link will bring you to a CCC request form where you can provide the details of your order. Once complete, please click the ‘Submit Request’ button and CCC’s Reprints Services team will generate a quote for your review.
Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles