Implications for treatment: pH, Helicobacter pylori or alternative approaches?

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/74597/1/j.1365-2036.2004.02351.x.pd

Functional Dyspepsia

Dyspepsia is a constellation of symptoms referable to the gastroduodenal region of the upper gastrointestinal tract. Functional dyspepsia, a relapsing and remitting disorder, is the most common cause of these symptoms. The current standard for the diagnosis of functional dyspepsia is the Rome III criteria, developed by the Rome III Committees, a multinational group of experts in the field, first convened in 1990, that meets regularly to review and revise the diagnostic criteria for all functional gastrointestinal disorders. In most patients with functional dyspepsia, the natural history is chronic and fluctuating, with periods of time when the patient is asymptomatic followed by episodes of symptom relapse. Data from population-based studies suggest that, during extended follow-up, approximately 15 to 20% of people with functional dyspepsia have persistent symptoms and 50% have resolution of symptoms; in the remaining 30 to 35% of patients symptoms will fluctuate and meet the criteria for another functional gastrointestinal disorder.81 Despite the chronic nature of functional dyspepsia, there is no evidence to suggest that it is associated with decreased survival

Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy to prevent gastric cancer in healthy asymptomatic infected individuals: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether searching for Helicobacter pylori and treating with eradication therapy leads to a reduction in incidence of gastric cancer among healthy asymptomatic infected individuals. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials were searched through to December 2013. Conference proceedings between 2001 and 2013 were hand searched. A recursive search was performed with bibliographies of relevant studies. There were no language restrictions. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials examining the effect of at least seven days of eradication therapy on subsequent occurrence of gastric cancer in adults who tested positive for Helicobacter pylori but otherwise healthy and asymptomatic were eligible. The control arm had to receive placebo or no treatment. Subjects had to be followed for ≥ 2 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome, defined a priori, was the effect of eradication therapy on the subsequent occurrence of gastric cancer expressed as a relative risk of gastric cancer with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 1560 citations, of which six individual randomised controlled trials were eligible. Fifty one (1.6%) gastric cancers occurred among 3294 individuals who received eradication therapy versus 76 (2.4%) in 3203 control subjects (relative risk 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.95), with no heterogeneity between studies (I(2)=0%, P=0.60). If the benefit of eradication therapy was assumed to persist lifelong the number needed to treat was as low as 15 for Chinese men and as high as 245 for US women. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide limited, moderate quality evidence that searching for and eradicating H pylori reduces the incidence of gastric cancer in healthy asymptomatic infected Asian individuals, but these data cannot necessarily be extrapolated to other populations

Eradication therapy for peptic ulcer disease in Helicobacter pylori-positive people

BACKGROUND: Peptic ulcer disease is the cause of dyspepsia in about 10% of people. Ninety-five percent of duodenal and 70% of gastric ulcers are associated with Helicobacter pylori. Eradication of H. pylori reduces the relapse rate of ulcers but the magnitude of this effect is uncertain. This is an update of Ford AC, Delaney B, Forman D, Moayyedi P. Eradication therapy for peptic ulcer disease in Helicobacter pylori-positive patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD003840. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003840.pub4. OBJECTIVES: To assess the proportion of peptic ulcers healed and the proportion of participants who remained free from relapse with eradication therapy against placebo or other pharmacological therapies in H. pylori-positive people.To assess the proportion of participants that achieved complete relief of symptoms and improvement in quality of life scores.To compare the incidence of adverse effects/drop-outs (total number for each drug) associated with the different treatments.To assess the proportion of participants in whom successful eradication was achieved. SEARCH METHODS: In this update, we identified trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to March 2016) and Ovid EMBASE (1980 to March 2016). To identify further relevant trials, we handsearched reference lists from trials selected by electronic searching, and published abstracts from conference proceedings from the United European Gastroenterology Week (published in Gut) and Digestive Disease Week (published in Gastroenterology). The search was last updated in March 2016. We contacted members of Cochrane Upper GI and Pancreatic Diseases, and experts in the field and asked them to provide details of outstanding clinical trials and any relevant unpublished materials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We analysed randomised controlled trials of short- and long-term treatment of peptic ulcer disease in H. pylori-positive adults. Participants received at least one week of H. pylori eradication compared with ulcer healing drug, placebo or no treatment. Trials were included if they reported assessment from two weeks onwards. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We collected data on ulcer healing, recurrence, relief of symptoms and adverse effects. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models with Review Manager software (RevMan 5.3) based on intention-to-treat analysis as far as possible. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 55 trials were included for one or more outcomes for this review.In duodenal ulcer healing, eradication therapy was superior to ulcer healing drug (UHD) (34 trials, 3910 participants, RR of ulcer persisting = 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.76; 381/2286 (adjusted proportion: 12.4%) in eradication therapy plus UHD versus 304/1624 (18.7%) in UHD; low quality evidence) and no treatment (two trials, 207 participants, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.53; 30/125 (adjusted proportion: 21.7%) in eradication therapy versus 48/82 (58.5%) in no treatment; low quality evidence).In gastric ulcer healing, the differences were imprecise between eradication therapy and UHD (15 trials, 1974 participants, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.68; 220/1192 (adjusted proportion: 16.0%) in eradication therapy plus UHD versus 102/782 (13.0%) in UHD; very low quality evidence). In preventing duodenal ulcer recurrence the differences were imprecise between maintenance therapy with H.pylori eradication therapy and maintenance therapy with UHD (four trials, 319 participants, RR of ulcer recurring 0.73; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.25; 19/159 (adjusted proportion: 11.9%) in eradication therapy versus 26/160 (16.3%) in UHD; very low quality evidence), but eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (27 trials 2509 participants, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.26; 215/1501 (adjusted proportion: 12.9%) in eradication therapy versus 649/1008 (64.4%) in no treatment; very low quality evidence).In preventing gastric ulcer recurrence, eradication therapy was superior to no treatment (12 trials, 1476 participants, RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.45; 116/697 (adjusted proportion: 16.3%) in eradication therapy versus 356/679 (52.4%) in no treatment; very low quality evidence). None of the trials reported proportion of people with gastric ulcer not healed after initial therapy between H.pylori eradication therapy and no active treatment or the proportion of people with recurrent gastric ulcer or peptic ulcers during maintenance therapy between H.pylori eradication therapy and ulcer healing drug therapy. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Adding a one to two-week course of H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment for people with H. pylori-positive duodenal ulcer when compared to ulcer healing drugs alone and no treatment. H. pylori eradication therapy is also effective in preventing recurrence of duodenal and gastric ulcer compared to no treatment. There is currently no evidence that H. pylori eradication therapy is an effective treatment in people with gastric ulcer or that it is effective in preventing recurrence of duodenal ulcer compared to ulcer healing drug. However, confidence intervals were wide and significant benefits or harms of H. pylori eradication therapy in acute ulcer healing of gastric ulcers compared to no treatment, and in preventing recurrence of duodenal ulcers compared to ulcer healing drugs cannot be ruled out

Effect of fibre, antispasmodics, and peppermint oil in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To determine the effect of fibre, antispasmodics, and peppermint oil in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane controlled trials register up to April 2008. Review methods: Randomised controlled trials comparing fibre, antispasmodics, and peppermint oil with placebo or no treatment in adults with irritable bowel syndrome were eligible for inclusion. The minimum duration of therapy considered was one week, and studies had to report either a global assessment of cure or improvement in symptoms, or cure of or improvement in abdominal pain, after treatment. A random effects model was used to pool data on symptoms, and the effect of therapy compared with placebo or no treatment was reported as the relative risk (95% confidence interval) of symptoms persisting. Results: 12 studies compared fibre with placebo or no treatment in 591 patients (relative risk of persistent symptoms 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.76 to 1.00). This effect was limited to ispaghula (0.78, 0.63 to 0.96). Twenty two trials compared antispasmodics with placebo in 1778 patients (0.68, 0.57 to 0.81). Various antispasmodics were studied, but otilonium (four trials, 435 patients, relative risk of persistent symptoms 0.55, 0.31 to 0.97) and hyoscine (three trials, 426 patients, 0.63, 0.51 to 0.78) showed consistent evidence of efficacy. Four trials compared peppermint oil with placebo in 392 patients (0.43, 0.32 to 0.59). Conclusion: Fibre, antispasmodics, and peppermint oil were all more effective than placebo in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome

Global prevalence of, and risk factors for, uninvestigated dyspepsia: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: Many cross-sectional surveys have reported the prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia, but there has been no recent systematic review of data from all studies to determine its global prevalence and risk factors. DESIGN: MEDLINE, EMBASE and EMBASE Classic were searched (until January 2014) to identify population-based studies that reported the prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia in adults (≥15 years old); dyspepsia was defined using symptom-based criteria or questionnaires. The prevalence of dyspepsia was extracted for all studies and according to the criteria used to define it. Pooled prevalence, according to study location and certain other characteristics, ORs and 95% CIs were calculated. RESULTS: Of the 306 citations evaluated, 103 reported the prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia in 100 separate study populations, containing 312 415 subjects. Overall pooled prevalence in all studies was 20.8% (95% CI 17.8% to 23.9%). The prevalence varied according to country (from 1.8% to 57.0%) and criteria used to define dyspepsia. The greatest prevalence values were found when a broad definition of dyspepsia (29.5%; 95% CI 25.3% to 33.8%) or upper abdominal or epigastric pain or discomfort (20.4%; 95% CI 16.3% to 24.8%) were used. The prevalence was higher in women (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.36), smokers (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.40), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) users (OR 1.59; 95% CI 1.27 to 1.99) and Helicobacter pylori-positive individuals (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.33). CONCLUSIONS: The overall pooled prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia was 21%, but varied among countries and according to the criteria used to define its presence. Prevalence is significantly higher in women, smokers, NSAID users and H. pylori-positive individuals, although these associations were modest

The EQ-5D (Euroqol) is a valid generic instrument for measuring quality of life in patients with dyspepsia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is little information of the validity of generic instruments in measuring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with dyspepsia. We aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the EQ-5D, a brief and simple instrument, in measuring HRQOL in adult patients with dyspepsia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Consecutive adults with dyspepsia attending the Gastroenterology clinic in a tertiary referral center were interviewed with the EQ-5D (both English and Malay versions), the short-form Nepean Dyspepsia Index (SF-NDI), the SF-36 and Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire (LDQ). Known-groups and convergent construct validity were investigated by testing hypotheses at attribute and overall levels. A repeat telephone interview was conducted 2 weeks later to assess test-retest reliability.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 113 patients (mean (SD) age: 53.7 (14) years; 49.5% male; 24.8% Malays, 37.2% Chinese; 70.8% functional dyspepsia) were recruited. Response rate was 100% with nil missing data. Known-groups validation revealed 20/26 hypotheses fulfillment. Patients with more severe dyspepsia reported more problems with their usual activity (p = 0.07) and pain (p = 0.06) and demonstrated lower median VAS scores (60 vs 70, p = 0.002) and EQ-5D utility scores (0.72 vs 0.78, p = 0.002). Those reporting problems in various EQ-5D dimensions had significantly lower scores in relevant SF-36 and SF-NDI dimensions. The overall EQ-5D utility score also demonstrated good correlation with the SF-36 summary physical and mental scores and the SF-NDI total score. Intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was 0.66 (95% CI = 0.55 – 0.76).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The EQ-5D is an acceptable, valid and reliable generic instrument for measuring HRQOL in adult patients with dyspepsia.</p

Quality of life in South East Asian patients who consult for dyspepsia: Validation of the short form Nepean Dyspepsia Index

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Insights into the evaluation and management of dyspepsia: recent developments and new guidelines

Dyspepsia is a very common gastrointestinal (GI) condition worldwide. We critically examine the recommendations of recently published guidelines for the management of dyspepsia, including those produced jointly by the American College of Gastroenterology and the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, and those published by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Dyspepsia is a symptom complex, characterized by a range of upper GI symptoms including epigastric pain or burning, early satiety, and post-prandial fullness. Although alarm features are used to help prioritize access to upper GI endoscopy, they are of limited utility in predicting endoscopic findings, and the majority of patients with dyspepsia will have no organic pathology identified at upper GI endoscopy. These patients are labelled as having functional dyspepsia (FD). The Rome IV criteria, which are used to define FD, further subclassify patients with FD as having either epigastric pain syndrome or post-prandial distress syndrome, depending on their predominant symptoms. Unfortunately, the Rome criteria perform poorly at identifying FD without the need for upper GI endoscopy. This has led to the investigation of alternative diagnostic approaches, including whether a capsaicin pill or combined serum biomarkers can accurately identify patients with FD. However, there is insufficient evidence to support either of these approaches at the present time. Patients with FD should be tested for H. pylori infection and be prescribed eradication therapy if they test positive. If they continue to have symptoms following this, then a trial of treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) should be given for up to 8 weeks. In cases where symptoms fail to adequately respond to PPI treatment, a tricyclic antidepressant may be of benefit, and should be continued for 6 to 12 months in patients who respond. Prokinetics demonstrate limited efficacy for treating FD, but could be considered if other strategies have failed. However, there are practical difficulties due to their limited availability in some countries and the risk of serious side effects. Patients with FD who fail to respond to drug treatments should be offered psychological therapy, where available. Overall, with the exception of recommendations relating to H. pylori testing and the prescription of PPIs, which are made on the basis of high-quality evidence, the evidence underpinning other elements of dyspepsia management is largely of low-quality. Consequently, there are still many aspects of the evaluation and management of dyspepsia that require further research