TY - JOUR
T1 - Oral therapy in children with cholera
T2 - A comparison of sucrose and glucose electrolyte solutions
AU - Sack, David A.
AU - Islam, Sirajul
AU - Brown, Kenneth H.
AU - Islam, Asma
AU - Kabir, A. K.M.Iqbal
AU - Chowdhury, Azad M.A.K.
AU - Ali, Md Akbar
N1 - Funding Information:
From The International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh, and The Division of Geographic Medicine The Johns Hopkins UniversitF. Supported by the International Centre.for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (formerly the Cholera Research Laboratory), and the International Center for Medieal Research (N1H grant 5RO7AIlO048-17). *Reprint address: Baltimore City Hospitals, 4940 Eastern A re., Baltimore, MD 21224.
PY - 1980/1
Y1 - 1980/1
N2 - We performed a double-blind trial comparing sucrose electrolyte oral solution with glucose electrolyte oral solution in children less than 5 years of age with severe cholera-like diarrhea. Of 111 patients studied (102 with bacteriologically confirmed cholera), 55 received sucrose solution and 56 received glucose solution. The success rates, as defined by the absence of the need to give unscheduled intravenous therapy, were similar in the two groups (73% and 77% in the sucrose and glucose groups, respectively). There was no difference in purging rates between the two groups. The primary determinant of success for oral fluid regardless of the sugar was the purging rate. Sucrose malabsorption was responsible for oral therapy failure in one child. This study demonstrates that sucrose is an effective alternative to glucose in the oral therapy solution, but either must be used in conjunction with intravenous solution when treating severe dehydrating diarrhea.
AB - We performed a double-blind trial comparing sucrose electrolyte oral solution with glucose electrolyte oral solution in children less than 5 years of age with severe cholera-like diarrhea. Of 111 patients studied (102 with bacteriologically confirmed cholera), 55 received sucrose solution and 56 received glucose solution. The success rates, as defined by the absence of the need to give unscheduled intravenous therapy, were similar in the two groups (73% and 77% in the sucrose and glucose groups, respectively). There was no difference in purging rates between the two groups. The primary determinant of success for oral fluid regardless of the sugar was the purging rate. Sucrose malabsorption was responsible for oral therapy failure in one child. This study demonstrates that sucrose is an effective alternative to glucose in the oral therapy solution, but either must be used in conjunction with intravenous solution when treating severe dehydrating diarrhea.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0018864077&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0018864077&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0022-3476(80)80317-9
DO - 10.1016/S0022-3476(80)80317-9
M3 - Article
C2 - 7350310
AN - SCOPUS:0018864077
VL - 96
SP - 20
EP - 25
JO - Journal of Pediatrics
JF - Journal of Pediatrics
SN - 0022-3476
IS - 1
ER -