Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Enteric coated pancreatic enzyme helps dogs with pancreatic
By Parambeth, Joseph Cyrus et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2018·Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Randomized placebo controlled clinical trial of an enteric coated micro-pelleted formulation of a pancreatic enzyme supplement in dogs with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
An 8-year-old mixed-breed dog with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) was given either a new enteric-coated pancreatic enzyme supplement or a standard uncoated version to see which worked better. After testing both options, there was no significant difference in how well the dog absorbed fat from food, meaning both supplements were similarly effective. The dog continued to receive care without any noticeable improvement from one treatment over the other.
People also search for: dog EPI treatment · pancreatic enzyme supplements for dogs · enteric coated enzymes for dogs
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic enzyme supplements for the treatment of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) in dogs can be uncoated or enteric coated. Enteric coated supplements might be advantageous. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: Enteric coated enzyme supplements are superior to uncoated supplements in dogs with clinical EPI. ANIMALS: Eleven dogs with naturally occurring EPI that were apparently free from other diseases. METHODS: Randomized, blinded, controlled cross-over clinical trial comparing a novel micro-encapsulated enteric coated enzyme supplement to a commercially available uncoated product in dogs with clinical EPI. Search of serum canine serum trypsin-like immunoreactivity concentration ≤ 2.5 µg/L in the Gastrointestinal Laboratory database was used to identify dogs with EPI. RESULTS: There was no difference -4.46% (95% CI: -7.97%--0.96%; P = .15) in the % acid hydrolysis fecal fat (primary outcome) between the enteric coated formulation (median: 11.8%; range 6.4%-17.0%) and the uncoated pancreatic enzyme replacement product (median: 17.5%; range: 5.2%-24.9%) in the 11 dogs that completed the study. Other variables did not differ between treatments. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: This study, which had low statistical power, did not detect a difference between formulations.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30221800/