Proton pump inhibitor versus prokinetic therapy in patients with functional dyspepsia: is therapeutic response predicted by Rome III subgroups?

Efficacy of Acupuncture Treatment for Postprandial Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy of acupuncture treatment for postprandial distress syndrome (PDS).

Methods

Search the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases with acupuncture randomized controlled trials for the treatment of patients with PDS. Strictly according to inclusion and exclusion quality assessment standards, the qualified ones are used to study the optimum extraction and data by two independent reviewers. Stata 15.0 software was used for meta-analysis.

Result

We initially identified 63 studies, of which five (1253 participants) were eventually included in our analysis. There were 643 cases in the experimental group and 610 cases in the control group. Acupuncture had a significant effect on the total therapeutic effect (OTE) at week 4 (OR 4.74, 95% CI 02.88-7.83, Z = 6.10, P = 0 < 0.05). Significantly improved NDI (Nepean dyspepsia index) scores of PDS patients at week 4 (SMD 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.74). Significantly improved NDI scores in PDS patients at week 16 (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71). After acupuncture treatment, the SID (dyspepsia symptom index) score of PDS patients decreased significantly at week 4 (SMD-0.52, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.32) and week 16 (SMD-0.59, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.36). Postprandial satiety scores (SMD-0.63, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.50) and early satiety scores (SMD-0.51, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.37) were also significantly lower at week 4 after acupuncture.

Conclusion

This study highlighted that the acupuncture could significantly improve the overall therapeutic effect of PDS patients, alleviate the symptoms of postprandial fullness and early satiety, and improve the quality of life of patients. Our results supported that acupuncture was an effective therapeutic strategy for postprandial distress syndrome.

Epidemiology and Clinical Characteristics Based on the Rome III and IV Criteria of Japanese Patients with Functional Dyspepsia

The subtypes of functional dyspepsia (FD) differ depending on whether the Rome III criteria or the Rome IV criteria are used. We investigated the ability to diagnose FD patients using the Rome III and IV criteria. The subtypes of FD were evaluated using the Rome questionnaire. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Score, health-related quality of life (HR-QOL; SF-8), and psychological scores (HADS, STAI) were evaluated. The questionnaire was collected from a total of 205 patients, and 54.1% were FD patients. The ratio of FD patients under the Rome III criteria was 19% for epigastric pain syndrome (EPS), 38% for postprandial distress syndrome (PDS), and 43% for an overlap of EPS and PDS, but under the Rome IV criteria overlap decreased to 17% and PDS increased to 64%. Patients whose subtype changed from overlap under the Rome III criteria to PDS under the Rome IV criteria were compared with PDS patients whose subtype did not change between the Rome III and IV criteria. The comparison showed that the former had significantly lower early satiation rates and significantly higher acid reflux and abdominal pain scores, demonstrating that EPS symptoms due to acid reflux after meals were clearly present. As a result of changing from the Rome III criteria to the Rome IV criteria, the number of overlap patients decreased, and the number of PDS patients increased.

Development and Validity Assessment of a Self-evaluation Questionnaire for Functional Dyspepsia: A Multicenter Prospective Study in Korea

Background/Aims

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are essential for clinical decision making, conduction of clinical research, and drug application acquisition in functional gastrointestinal disorders. The aim of this study is to develop a PRO instrument and to determine the respondents’ perception of the efficacy of therapeutic agents for functional dyspepsia (FD).

Methods

A self-evaluation questionnaire for dyspepsia (SEQ-DYSPEPSIA) was developed and validated through a structured process. The 2-week reproducibility was evaluated, and the construct validity was assessed by correlating the scores of SEQ-DYSPEPSIA (including typical and major FD symptom subscales). Finally, the response to medication was assessed by comparing the changes after 4 weeks of treatment.

Results

A total of 193 Korean patients (age 48.5 ± 13.6 years, 69.4% women) completed the questionnaire. SEQ-DYSPEPSIA with 11 items had a good internal consistency (alpha = 0.770-0.905) and an acceptable test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.733-0.859). The self-evaluation questionnaire (SEQ)-major FD score highly correlated with the postprandial fullness/early satiety domain of the Patient Assessment of Gastrointestinal Symptom Severity Index (correlation coefficient r = 0.741, P < 0.001), Nepean Dyspepsia Index-Korean version (NDI-K) (r = 0.839, P < 0.001), and NDI-K quality of life (r = −0.275 to −0.344, P < 0.001). After medical treatment, decrease in the SEQ-typical FD and SEQ-major FD was significantly greater in the responder group than in non-responder group (P = 0.019 and P = 0.009, respectively).

Conclusion

This study suggests that the Korean version of SEQ-DYSPEPSIA has good reliability and validity, and can be a useful PRO measurement tool in patients with FD.

Comparative Efficacy of Various Pharmacological Interventions in the Treatment of Functional Dyspepsia: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Patients with functional dyspepsia often select different pharmacological treatments. We aimed to compare and rank the efficacy of different pharmacological interventions in treating functional dyspepsia.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science and MEDLINE from the date of database inception to March 28, 2019. A random-effects model was selected to conduct traditional meta-analysis to directly examine the efficacy of different pharmacological interventions. The consistency model was selected to conduct a network meta-analysis to evaluate the relative effects and rank probability of different pharmacological interventions.

RESULTS

We included 58 trials (15,629 participants and 21 pharmacological treatments). Network meta-analysis showed that cisapride, domperidone, itopride, and levosulpiride were better than placebo, especially in short term (< 4 weeks). And levosulpiride was significantly more effective than 15 other drugs and placebo (ORs ranging between 0.05 and 0.15). Cisapride was significantly more effective than lansoprazole (OR 0.30, 95% CrI 0.09-0.99) and tegaserod (OR 0.26, 95% CrI 0.07-0.98). The rank probability showed that levosulpiride was most likely to be rank 1 (77%), cinitapride rank 2 (17%), and cisapride rank 3 (23%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirmed the effectiveness of several pharmacological treatments for ameliorating functional dyspepsia. Furthermore, levosulpiride relatively ranked the best in managing FD. Physicians should be encouraged to apply promising pharmacological interventions (e.g., levosulpiride and cisapride). However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to small study effects.

United European Gastroenterology (UEG) and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) consensus on functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is one of the most common conditions in clinical practice. In spite of its prevalence, FD is associated with major uncertainties in terms of its definition, underlying pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis.

METHODS

A Delphi consensus was initiated with 41 experts from 22 European countries who conducted a literature summary and voting process on 87 statements. Quality of evidence was evaluated using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Consensus (defined as >80% agreement) was reached for 36 statements.

RESULTS

The panel agreed with the definition in terms of its cardinal symptoms (early satiation, postprandial fullness, epigastric pain, and epigastric burning), its subdivision into epigastric pain syndrome and postprandial distress syndrome, and the presence of accessory symptoms (upper abdominal bloating, nausea, belching), and overlapping conditions. Also, well accepted are the female predominance of FD, its impact on quality of life and health costs, and acute gastrointestinal infections, and anxiety as risk factors. In terms of pathophysiological mechanisms, the consensus supports a role for impaired gastric accommodation, delayed gastric emptying, hypersensitivity to gastric distention, Helicobacter pylori infection, and altered central processing of signals from the gastroduodenal region. There is consensus that endoscopy is mandatory for establishing a firm diagnosis of FD, but that in primary care, patients without alarm symptoms or risk factors can be managed without endoscopy. There is consensus that H. pylori status should be determined in every patient with dyspeptic symptoms and H. pylori positive patients should receive eradication therapy. Also, proton pump inhibitor therapy is considered an effective therapy for FD, but no other treatment approach reached a consensus. The long-term prognosis and life expectancy are favorable.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

A multinational group of European experts summarized the current state of consensus on the definition, diagnosis and management of FD.

Efficacy of acotiamide on postprandial distress syndrome and epigastric pain syndrome depending on the estimated gastric acid secretion level

Background/Aims

Gastric acid secretion is suspected to be a pivotal contributor to the pathogenesis of functional dyspepsia. The present study investigates the potential association of the gastric acid secretion estimated by measuring serum pepsinogen with therapeutic responsiveness to the prokinetic drug acotiamide.

Methods

Dyspeptic patients consulting participating clinics from October 2017 to March 2019 were prospectively enrolled in the study. The dyspeptic symptoms were classified into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS). Gastric acid secretion levels were estimated by the Helicobacter pylori infection status and serum pepsinogen using established criteria and classified into hypo-, normo-, and hyper-secretion. Each patient was then administered 100 mg acotiamide thrice daily for 4 weeks, and the response rate to the treatment was evaluated using the overall treatment efficacy scale.

Results

Of the 86 enrolled patients, 56 (65.1%) and 26 (30.2%) were classified into PDS and EPS, respectively. The estimated gastric acid secretion was not significantly different between PDS and EPS. The response rates were 66.0% for PDS and 73.1% for EPS, showing no significant difference. While the response rates were stable, ranging from 61.0% to 75.0% regardless of the estimated gastric acid secretion level among subjects with PDF, the rates were significantly lower in hyper-secretors than in non-hyper-secretors among subjects with EPS (42.0% vs 83.0%, P = 0.046).

Conclusion

Although acotiamide is effective for treating EPS as well as PDS overall, the efficacy is somewhat limited in EPS with gastric acid hyper-secretion, with gastric acid suppressants, such as proton pump inhibitors, being more suitable.

Effects of Rome IV Definitions of Functional Dyspepsia Subgroups in Secondary Care

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is subdivided into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) according to the Rome III consensus. In clinical practice, there is a major overlap between these subgroups. The Rome IV criteria included postprandially occurring symptoms in the PDS subgroup. We aimed to analyze the effects of the Rome IV criteria, compared with Rome III, on FD subgroups in patients recruited from secondary care.

METHODS

Patients with FD (n = 224; mean age, 43 ± 1 y; 77% women) were recruited from secondary-care units in Belgium and filled out symptom questionnaires, allowing subdivision according to Rome III and Rome IV criteria and identification of postprandial symptoms. Symptom patterns and demographics were compared between the subgroups. Statistical analysis was performed using the t test and the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

According to the Rome III criteria, 25% of participants had PDS, 8% had EPS, and 67% had an overlap. Postprandial fullness, early satiation, and bloating were present in significantly more patients in the PDS and overlap groups than the EPS group (P < .0001). A higher proportion of patients in the overlap group showed symptoms such as postprandial epigastric pain and nausea than in the EPS group (both P ≤ .02). With the Rome IV criteria, the overlap group was reduced to 35%; 57% of patients were considered to have PDS and 8% to have EPS. Postprandial pain was significantly more prevalent in the PDS than in the EPS group (P ≤ .002), and postprandial nausea was significantly more prevalent in the PDS group than the overlap group (P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with Rome III criteria, the Rome IV criteria significantly reduces the overlap between PDS and EPS groups. Studies are needed to determine if Rome IV subgroups are associated differently with psychological comorbidities and treatment responses.

The Usefulness of Symptom-based Subtypes of Functional Dyspepsia for Predicting Underlying Pathophysiologic Mechanisms and Choosing Appropriate Therapeutic Agents

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is considered to be a heterogeneous disorder with different pathophysiological mechanisms or pathogenetic factors. In addition to traditional mechanisms, novel concepts regarding pathophysiologic mechanisms of FD have been proposed. Candidates of therapeutic agents based on novel concepts have also been suggested. FD is a symptom complex and currently diagnosed by symptom-based Rome criteria. In the Rome criteria, symptom-based subtypes of FD including postprandial distress syndrome and epigastric pain syndrome are recommended to be used, based on the assumption that each subtype is more homogenous in terms of underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms than FD as a whole. In this review, the usefulness of symptombased subtypes of FD for predicting underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms and choosing appropriate therapeutic agents was evaluated. Although several classic pathophysiologic mechanisms are suggested to be associated with individual dyspeptic symptoms, symptom-based subtypes of FD are not specific for a certain pathogenetic factor or pathophysiologic mechanism, and may be frequently associated with multiple pathophysiologic abnormalities. Novel concepts on the pathophysiology of FD show complex interactions between pathophysiologic mechanisms and pathogenetic factors, and prediction of underlying mechanisms of individual patients simply by the symptom pattern or symptom-based subtypes may not be accurate in a considerable proportion of cases. Therefore, subtyping by the Rome criteria appears to have limited value to guide therapeutic strategy, suggesting that the addition of objective parameters or subclassification reflecting physiologic or pathologic tests may be necessary for the targeted therapeutic approaches, particularly when therapeutic agents targeting novel mechanisms are available.

United European Gastroenterology (UEG) and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) consensus on functional dyspepsia

Background

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is one of the most common conditions in clinical practice. In spite of its prevalence, FD is associated with major uncertainties in terms of its definition, underlying pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis.

Methods

A Delphi consensus was initiated with 41 experts from 22 European countries who conducted a literature summary and voting process on 87 statements. Quality of evidence was evaluated using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Consensus (defined as >80% agreement) was reached for 36 statements.

Results

The panel agreed with the definition in terms of its cardinal symptoms (early satiation, postprandial fullness, epigastric pain, and epigastric burning), its subdivision into epigastric pain syndrome and postprandial distress syndrome, and the presence of accessory symptoms (upper abdominal bloating, nausea, belching), and overlapping conditions. Also, well accepted are the female predominance of FD, its impact on quality of life and health costs, and acute gastrointestinal infections, and anxiety as risk factors. In terms of pathophysiological mechanisms, the consensus supports a role for impaired gastric accommodation, delayed gastric emptying, hypersensitivity to gastric distention, Helicobacter pylori infection, and altered central processing of signals from the gastroduodenal region. There is consensus that endoscopy is mandatory for establishing a firm diagnosis of FD, but that in primary care, patients without alarm symptoms or risk factors can be managed without endoscopy. There is consensus that H. pylori status should be determined in every patient with dyspeptic symptoms and H. pylori positive patients should receive eradication therapy. Also, proton pump inhibitor therapy is considered an effective therapy for FD, but no other treatment approach reached a consensus. The long‐term prognosis and life expectancy are favorable.

Conclusions and Inferences

A multinational group of European experts summarized the current state of consensus on the definition, diagnosis and management of FD.

Current knowledge

Functional dyspepsia is one of the most common conditions encountered in clinical practice.

There is a lack of guidance for clinicians in guiding diagnosis and treatment of this prevalent condition.

No treatments are currently approved for the treatment of functional dyspepsia in Europe.

What is new here

A Delphi panel consisting of 41 experts from 22 European countries established the level of consensus on 87 statements regarding functional dyspepsia.

The statements reaching consensus serve to guide clinicians in recognizing, diagnosing and treating FD in clinical practice.

Endoscopy is mandatory for establishing a firm diagnosis of functional dyspepsia D, but in primary care patients without alarm symptoms or risk factors can be managed without endoscopy.

Helicobacter pylori status should be determined in every patient with dyspeptic symptoms and H. Pylori positive patients should receive eradication therapy.

Proton pump inhibitor‐therapy is considered an effective therapy for FD, but no other treatment approach reached consensus support.

Efficacy and Safety of DWJ1252 Compared With Gasmotin in the Treatment of Functional Dyspepsia: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Active-controlled Study

Background/Aims

Prokinetics such as mosapride citrate CR (conventional-release; Gasmotin) are commonly used in functional dyspepsia (FD). This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-a-day mosapride citrate SR (DWJ1252), a sustained-release formulation of mosapride citrate, compared with mosapride citrate CR 3 times a day, in patients with FD.

Methods

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority study, 119 patients with FD (by the Rome III criteria, 60 for mosapride citrate SR and 59 for mosapride citrate CR) were randomly allocated to mosapride citrate SR once daily or mosapride citrate CR thrice daily for 4 weeks in 16 medical institutions. Primary end point was the change in gastrointestinal symptom (GIS) score from baseline, assessed by GIS questionnaires on 5-point Likert scale after 4-week treatment. Secondary end points and safety profiles were also analyzed.

Results

The study included 51 and 49 subjects in the mosapride citrate SR and mosapride citrate CR groups, respectively. GIS scores at week 4 were significantly reduced in both groups (mean ± SD: -10.04 ± 4.45 and -10.86 ± 5.53 in the mosapride citrate SR and mosapride citrate CR groups, respectively; P < 0.001), and the GIS changes from baseline did not differ between the 2 groups (difference, 0.82 point; 95% CI, -1.17, 2.81; P = 0.643). Changes in GIS at weeks 2 and 4 and quality of life at week 4, and the improvement rates of global assessments at weeks 2 and 4, did not differ between the groups. Adverse events were similar in the 2 groups, and there were no serious adverse events.

Conclusion

In patients with FD, mosapride citrate SR once daily is as effective as mosapride citrate CR thrice daily, with a similar safety profile.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis: efficacy of drugs for functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a relapsing and remitting condition affecting between 5% and 10% of people. Efficacious therapies are available, but their relative efficacy is unknown.

AIM

To perform a systematic review with network meta-analysis to resolve this uncertainty.

METHODS

We searched the medical literature through July 2020 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing efficacy of drugs for adults with FD, compared with each other, or placebo. Trials reported a dichotomous assessment of symptom status after completion of therapy. We pooled data using a random effects model. Efficacy was reported as a pooled relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic with a 95% confidence interval (CI) to summarise efficacy of each comparison tested. Relative ranking was assessed with surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities.

RESULTS

We identified 71 eligible RCTs (19 243 participants). Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) were ranked second for efficacy (RR of remaining symptomatic = 0.71; 95% CI 0.58-0.87, SUCRA 0.87), and first when only low risk of bias trials were included. Most RCTs that used TCAs recruited patients who were refractory to other drugs included in the network. Although sulpiride or levosulpiride were ranked first for efficacy (RR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.36-0.69, SUCRA 0.99), trial quality was low and only 86 patients received active therapy. TCAs were more likely to cause adverse events than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

TCAs, histamine-₂ receptor antagonists, standard- and low-dose proton pump inhibitors, sulpiride or levosulpiride, itopride and acotiamide were all more efficacious than placebo for FD.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Functional Dyspepsia Overlap: Do Birds of a Feather Flock Together?

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and functional dyspepsia (FD) are 2 of the most prevalent upper gastrointestinal (GI) disorders in the Western world. Previous Rome definitions excluded patients with predominant heartburn from the definition of FD because they were considered to have GERD. However, more recent studies showed that heartburn and acid regurgitation are also common symptoms in patients with FD. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the prevalence of overlap between GERD and FD, the underlying pathophysiology and implications for treatment.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed using the PubMed database, and a meta-analysis with random effects model was completed.

RESULTS

This review showed considerable overlap between GERD and FD. A meta-analysis on the data included in this review showed 7.41% (confidence interval [CI]: 4.55%-11.84%) GERD/FD overlap in the general population, 41.15% (CI: 29.46%-53.93%) GERD with FD symptoms, and 31.32% (CI: 19.43%-46.29%) FD with GERD symptoms. Although numerous committees and consensus groups attempted to develop uniform definitions for the diagnosis of GERD and FD, various diagnostic criteria are used across studies and clinical trials (frequency, severity, and location of symptoms). Several studies showed that the overlap between GERD and FD can be explained by a shared pathophysiology, including delayed gastric emptying and disturbed gastric accommodation.

DISCUSSION

For diagnoses of GERD and FD, uniform definitions that are easy to implement in population studies, easy to interpret for physicians, and that need to be well explained to patients to avoid overestimation or underestimation of true prevalence are needed. Both GERD and FD coexist more frequently than expected, based on coincidence, suggesting a potential pathophysiological link. More research is needed to explore the common GERD/FD overlap population to identify the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, which may lead to a more effective therapeutic approach.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy in patients with hypertension, cardiovascular, renal or gastrointestinal comorbidities: joint APAGE/APLAR/APSDE/APSH/APSN/PoA recommendations

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the most commonly prescribed medications, but they are associated with a number of serious adverse effects, including hypertension, cardiovascular disease, kidney injury and GI complications.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a set of multidisciplinary recommendations for the safe prescription of NSAIDs.

METHODS

Randomised control trials and observational studies published before January 2018 were reviewed, with 329 papers included for the synthesis of evidence-based recommendations.

RESULTS

Whenever possible, a NSAID should be avoided in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension, high risk of cardiovascular disease and severe chronic kidney disease (CKD). Before treatment with a NSAID is started, blood pressure should be measured, unrecognised CKD should be screened in high risk cases, and unexplained iron-deficiency anaemia should be investigated. For patients with high cardiovascular risk, and if NSAID treatment cannot be avoided, naproxen or celecoxib are preferred. For patients with a moderate risk of peptic ulcer disease, monotherapy with a non-selective NSAID plus a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), or a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor should be used; for those with a high risk of peptic ulcer disease, a selective COX-2 inhibitor plus PPI are needed. For patients with pre-existing hypertension receiving renin-angiotensin system blockers, empirical addition (or increase in the dose) of an antihypertensive agent of a different class should be considered. Blood pressure and renal function should be monitored in most cases.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs are a valuable armamentarium in clinical medicine, but appropriate recognition of high-risk cases, selection of a specific agent, choice of ulcer prophylaxis and monitoring after therapy are necessary to minimise the risk of adverse events.

Review article: treatment options for functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia, consisting of epigastric pain syndrome and postprandial distress syndrome, is a prevalent functional gastrointestinal disorder. To date, only limited treatment options are available and conflicting results in terms of efficacy have been reported. Consequently, nonpharmacological treatment options are increasingly being explored for functional dyspepsia.

AIM

To provide an overview of current pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment options for functional dyspepsia.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on Pubmed and other sources to identify relevant studies.

RESULTS

Acid suppressive therapy reduced symptoms in 30%-70% of the patients, with higher benefit in epigastric pain syndrome and superior effectiveness for proton pump inhibitors compared to H₂ -antagonists. Prokinetic agents, primarily used to treat postprandial distress syndrome, showed variable efficiency: 59%-81% responder rate for dopamine receptor antagonists, 32%-91% for serotonin-4-receptor agonists and 31%-80% for muscarinic receptor antagonists. H Pylori eradication, recommended in infected patients, was effective in 24%-82%. Refractory symptoms are addressed with neuromodulators. However, their efficacy in functional dyspepsia remains incompletely elucidated, available data showing symptom reduction in 27%-71% of the patients. Regarding herbal agents, peppermint oil reduced symptoms in 66%-91%, rikkunshito in 29%-34% and iberogast in 20%-95%. Lastly, acupuncture, cognitive behavioural therapy and hypnotherapy may help to provide symptom control, but research on their efficacy remains sparse.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the available therapies is effective in the majority of patients without being associated with major side effects. Developing new treatment options is challenging due to the heterogeneity of functional dyspepsia, the lack of readily identified target mechanisms and the poor association between pathophysiological disturbances and symptoms.

Postprandial distress syndrome: stratification and management

Functional dyspepsia (FD), defined by the Rome consensus as the presence of functional symptoms originating from the gastroduodenum, is one of the most common functional gastrointestinal disorders. FD is subdivided into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS), with meal-related symptoms such as postprandial fullness and early satiation, and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS), with meal-unrelated symptoms such as epigastric pain or burning. We used a literature search for a narrative review on the current state of knowledge regarding PDS. Areas covered: Epidemiological studies support PDS as a separate entity and the biggest FD subgroup. The pathophysiology of PDS is heterogeneous, and disorders of gastric sensorimotor function as well as low grade duodenal inflammation have been implicated. Although prokinetic agents may provide the most pathophysiology-oriented treatment option, there is a paucity of suitable agents, and proton pump inhibitors are the traditional first-line therapy. Other options include agents that enhance gastric accommodation, such as acotiamide and 5-HT_1A agonists, neuromodulators such as mirtazapine, and traditional medicine approaches. Expert commentary: PDS is highly prevalent, with probably heterogeneous underlying pathophysiology. Motility modifying agents and neuromodulators are the cornerstone of PDS therapy, but there is a need for high quality studies of new therapeutic approaches.

Proton pump inhibitors for functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD or non-ulcer dyspepsia) is defined as continuous or frequently recurring epigastric pain or discomfort for which no organic cause can be found. Acid suppressive therapy, including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), has been proposed as a therapeutic option in FD, but its efficacy remains controversial. While PPIs are generally considered safe and well tolerated, they have been associated with adverse events, especially in the long term. For this reason, decisions on whether to initiate or continue PPI therapy should be made based on an appropriate clinical indication. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate whether PPI therapy provides symptomatic relief in FD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in the improvement of global symptoms of dyspepsia and quality of life compared to placebo, H2 receptor antagonists or prokinetics, in people with functional dyspepsia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched in the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Library (to May 2017), MEDLINE (OvidSP; to May 2017), Embase (OvidSP; to May 2017), and SIGLE grey literature (up to May 2017) and clinical trial registries; we handsearched abstracts from conferences up to May 2017. We screened non-systematic reviews, systematic reviews and guidelines to identify any additional trials. We contacted trialists to obtain missing information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any PPI with placebo, H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) or prokinetics for the treatment of FD of at least two weeks' duration. Participants were adults (aged 16 years or greater) with an adequate diagnosis of FD (any validated criteria such as Rome I, II, III or Lancet Working Group).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and trial quality, and extracted data. We collected data on dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life and number of overall adverse events. Specific adverse events were beyond the scope of this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 25 RCTs from 27 papers (with 8453 participants) studying the effect of PPIs versus placebo, H2RAs or prokinetics for improvement of global symptoms of dyspepsia and quality of life in people with FD. Low-dose PPIs had similar efficacy as standard-dose PPIs, therefore we combined these subgroups for the analysis. PPI was more effective than placebo at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms in people with FD (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.94; participants = 6172; studies = 18; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 11; moderate quality evidence). PPIs may have little or no effect compared with H2RAs (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.04; participants = 740; studies = 2; low quality evidence), and may be slightly more effective than prokinetics (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99; participants = 1033; studies = 5; NNTB 16; low quality evidence) at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms in people with FD. PPIs plus prokinetics have probably little or no effect compared with PPIs alone at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.08; participants = 407; studies = 2; moderate quality evidence).There was no difference when subgrouped by Helicobacter pylori status, country of origin, or presence of reflux or Rome III subtypes. There were no differences in the number of adverse events observed between PPIs and any of the other treatments. There were fewer adverse events in the combination of PPI plus prokinetics compared to prokinetics alone (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.93; participants = 407; studies = 2; moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that PPIs are effective for the treatment of FD, independent of the dose and duration of treatment compared with placebo. PPIs may be slightly more effective than prokinetics for the treatment of FD; however, the evidence is scarce. The trials evaluating PPIs versus prokinetics are difficult to interpret as they are at risk of bias. Although the effect of these drugs seems to be small, the drugs are well tolerated.

ACG and CAG Clinical Guideline: Management of Dyspepsia

We have updated both the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) and the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) guidelines on dyspepsia in a joint ACG/CAG dyspepsia guideline. We suggest that patients ≥60 years of age presenting with dyspepsia are investigated with upper gastrointestinal endoscopy to exclude organic pathology. This is a conditional recommendation and patients at higher risk of malignancy (such as spending their childhood in a high risk gastric cancer country or having a positive family history) could be offered an endoscopy at a younger age. Alarm features should not automatically precipitate endoscopy in younger patients but this should be considered on a case-by-case basis. We recommend patients <60 years of age have a non-invasive test Helicobacter pylori and treatment if positive. Those that are negative or do not respond to this approach should be given a trial of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. If these are ineffective tricyclic antidepressants (TCA) or prokinetic therapies can be tried. Patients that have an endoscopy where no pathology is found are defined as having functional dyspepsia (FD). H. pylori eradication should be offered in these patients if they are infected. We recommend PPI, TCA and prokinetic therapy (in that order) in those that fail therapy or are H. pylori negative. We do not recommend routine upper gastrointestinal (GI) motility testing but it may be useful in selected patients.

Prokinetics for the treatment of functional dyspepsia: Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Controversies persist regarding the effect of prokinetics for the treatment of functional dyspepsia (FD). This study aimed to assess the comparative efficacy of prokinetic agents for the treatment of FD.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prokinetics for the treatment of FD were identified from core databases. Symptom response rates were extracted and analyzed using odds ratios (ORs). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method in WinBUGS and NetMetaXL.

RESULTS

In total, 25 RCTs, which included 4473 patients with FD who were treated with 6 different prokinetics or placebo, were identified and analyzed. Metoclopramide showed the best surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probability (92.5%), followed by trimebutine (74.5%) and mosapride (63.3%). However, the therapeutic efficacy of metoclopramide was not significantly different from that of trimebutine (OR:1.32, 95% credible interval: 0.27-6.06), mosapride (OR: 1.99, 95% credible interval: 0.87-4.72), or domperidone (OR: 2.04, 95% credible interval: 0.92-4.60). Metoclopramide showed better efficacy than itopride (OR: 2.79, 95% credible interval: 1.29-6.21) and acotiamide (OR: 3.07, 95% credible interval: 1.43-6.75). Domperidone (SUCRA probability 62.9%) showed better efficacy than itopride (OR: 1.37, 95% credible interval: 1.07-1.77) and acotiamide (OR: 1.51, 95% credible interval: 1.04-2.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Metoclopramide, trimebutine, mosapride, and domperidone showed better efficacy for the treatment of FD than itopride or acotiamide. Considering the adverse events related to metoclopramide or domperidone, the short-term use of these agents or the alternative use of trimebutine or mosapride could be recommended for the symptomatic relief of FD.

Proton pump inhibitors for functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD or non-ulcer dyspepsia) is defined as continuous or frequently recurring epigastric pain or discomfort for which no organic cause can be found. Acid suppressive therapy, including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), has been proposed as a therapeutic option in FD, but its efficacy remains controversial. While PPIs are generally considered safe and well tolerated, they have been associated with adverse events, especially in the long term. For this reason, decisions on whether to initiate or continue PPI therapy should be made based on an appropriate clinical indication. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate whether PPI therapy provides symptomatic relief in FD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in the improvement of global symptoms of dyspepsia and quality of life compared to placebo, H2 receptor antagonists or prokinetics, in people with functional dyspepsia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched in the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Library (to January 2016), MEDLINE (OvidSP; to February 2016), Embase (OvidSP; to February 2016), and SIGLE grey literature (up to February 2016) and clinical trial registries; we handsearched abstracts from conferences up to February 2016. We screened non-systematic reviews, systematic reviews and guidelines to identify any additional trials. We contacted trialists to obtain missing information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any PPI with placebo, H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) or prokinetics for the treatment of FD. Participants were adults (aged 16 years or greater) with an adequate diagnosis of FD (any validated criteria such as Rome I, II, III or Lancet Working Group).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility, trial quality and extracted data. We collected data on dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life and number of overall adverse events. Specific adverse events were beyond the scope of this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 23 RCTs from 22 papers (with 8759 participants) studying the effect of PPIs versus placebo, H2RAs or prokinetics for improvement of global symptoms of dyspepsia and quality of life in people with FD. Low-dose PPIs had similar efficacy as standard-dose PPIs, therefore we combined these subgroups for the analysis. Two to eight weeks of therapy with PPI was slightly more effective than placebo at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms in people with FD (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.94; participants = 5968; studies = 16; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 13; moderate quality evidence). PPIs may be slightly more effective than H2RAs (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.04; participants = 740; studies = 2, NNTB 13; low quality evidence), and slightly more effective than prokinetics (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.00; participants = 892; studies = 4; NNTB 20; low quality evidence) at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms in people with FD. PPIs plus prokinetics were possibly slightly more effective than PPIs alone at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.08; participants = 407; studies = 2; NNTB 18; moderate quality evidence).The was no difference when subgrouped by Helicobacter pylori status, country of origin, or presence of reflux or Rome III subtypes. There were no differences in the number of adverse events observed between PPIs and any of the other treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that PPIs are effective for the treatment of FD, independent of the dose and duration of treatment compared with placebo. PPIs may be slightly more effective than H2RAs for the treatment of FD; however, the evidence is scarce. The trials evaluating PPIs versus prokinetics are difficult to interpret as they are at risk of bias. Although the effect of these drugs seems to be small, the drugs are well tolerated.

Antidepressants in the Treatment of Functional Dyspepsia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants have been empirically used in the treatment of functional dyspepsia (FD). However, results from recent clinical trials investigating their efficacy are conflicting. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of antidepressants in the management of FD in adults.

METHODS

Databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and BIOSIS Previews were searched for all randomized controlled trials (RCT) investigating efficacy of antidepressants in the management of FD in adult patients. Data of overall symptom unimproved and adverse events were compared between the antidepressants and placebo group.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 432 citations. Of those, eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled relative risk (RR) of symptom unimproved with tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) versus placebo was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.62 to 0.94, P = 0.01; I2 = 0%, P = 0.39). By contrast, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) did not show a benefit over placebo (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.17, P = 0.95; I2 = 0%, P = 0.82). Adverse events were significantly more frequent among patients receiving antidepressants than those receiving placebos (RR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.14 to 2.35, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

TCAs but not SSRIs, are effective in the treatment of FD, but antidepressants were also associated with more adverse events compared with placebo.

The effect of levosulpiride on in vitro motor patterns in the human gastric fundus, antrum, and jejunum

BACKGROUND

Levosulpiride is a 5HT4 agonist/D2 antagonist prokinetic agent used to improve gastric emptying in patients with functional dyspepsia or gastroparesis. The aim of this study was to characterize its effect on the main in vitro motility patterns in the human fundus, antrum, and jejunum.

METHODS

Circular muscle strips from human stomach (antrum and fundus) and jejunum, obtained from 46 patients undergoing bariatric surgery, were studied using organ baths. Enteric motor neurons (EMNs) were stimulated by electrical field stimulation (EFS).

KEY RESULTS

Levosulpiride, caused an increase in the EFS-induced cholinergic contractions in the gastric antrum (+37 ± 15.18% at 100 μM, pEC50 = 4.46 ± 0.14; p < 0.05, n = 8) and jejunum (+45.4 ± 22.03% at 100 μM, pEC50 = 3.78 ± 6.81; p < 0.05, n = 5), but not in the gastric fundus. It also caused a slight decrease in tone and frequency of spontaneous contractions in the jejunum, but did not have any major effect on tone or spontaneous contractions in the stomach. It did not have any effect on EFS-induced relaxations mediated by nitric oxide (NO) in the stomach (antrum and fundus) and by NO and ATP in the jejunum.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Our results suggest that the prokinetic effects of levosulpiride in humans are mainly due to the facilitation of the release of acetylcholine by enteric motor neurons in the gastric antrum and the jejunum.

Efficacy of DA-9701 (Motilitone) in Functional Dyspepsia Compared to Pantoprazole: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Non-inferiority Study

Background/Aims

The effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) in Asian functional dyspepsia (FD) patients has not been well established as in Western countries. DA-9701, a novel prokinetic agent, stimulates gastric emptying and modulates visceral hypersensitivity in vivo and in human studies. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of DA-9701 with a conventional PPI in mono or combination therapy in patients with FD.

Methods

In this double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority trial, 389 patients diagnosed with FD using Rome III criteria were allocated among 3 groups: 30-mg DA-9701 t.i.d (means 3 times a day), 40-mg pantoprazole, and 30-mg DA-9701 t.i.d + 40-mg pantoprazole. The primary efficacy end-point was a global assessment of the patient binary response or response on a 5-Likert scale after 4 weeks.

Results

The global symptomatic improvement was 60.5% in the DA-9701 group, 65.6% in the pantoprazole group, and 63.5% in the DA-9701 + pantoprazole group using a 5-Likert scale at week 4 with no significant difference among 3 groups (P = 0.685). Symptom improvement measured by binary outcome was significantly achieved in each of the 3 groups, but not different among groups. Patients in all treatment groups reported significant improvement in the response rate and symptoms according to FD subtypes and dyspepsia-related quality of life (P < 0.001), but there were no significant differences among the 3 groups.

Conclusions

DA-9701 improves global and individual symptoms and increases dyspepsia-specific quality of life in patients with FD. The efficacy of DA-9701 monotherapy is comparable with pantoprazole and there is no additive effect with combination of DA-9701 and pantoprazole in patients with FD.

Distinct aetiopathogenesis in subgroups of functional dyspepsia according to the Rome III criteria

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Whether there is distinct pathogenesis in subgroups of functional dyspepsia (FD), the postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) remains controversial. We aimed to identify the risk factors of FD and its subgroups in the Chinese population.

METHODS

Patients with dyspepsia and healthy subjects who underwent gastric cancer screening were enrolled in this multicentre study from 2010 to 2012. All patients were evaluated by questionnaire, oesophagoduodenoscopy, histological examination and Helicobacter pylori tests. Subgroups of FD were classified according to the Rome III criteria. Psychiatric stress was assessed by the short form Brief Symptom Rating Scale. CagA and VacA genotypes were determined by PCR.

RESULTS

Of 2378 patients screened for eligibility, 771 and 491 fulfilled the diagnostic criteria of uninvestigated dyspepsia and FD, respectively. 298 (60.7%) and 353 (71.9%) individuals were diagnosed with EPS and PDS, respectively, whereas 169 (34.4%) had the overlap syndrome. As compared with 1031 healthy controls, PDS and EPS shared some common risk factors, including younger age (OR 0.95; 99.5% CI 0.93 to 0.98), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (OR 6.60; 99.5% CI 3.13 to 13.90), anxiety (OR 3.41; 99.5% CI 2.01 to 5.77) and concomitant IBS (OR 6.89; 99.5% CI 3.41 to 13.94). By contrast, H. pylori (OR 1.86; 99.5% CI 1.01 to 3.45), unmarried status (OR 4.22; 99.5% CI 2.02 to 8.81), sleep disturbance (OR 2.56; 99.5% CI 1.29 to 5.07) and depression (OR 2.34; 99.5% CI 1.04 to 5.36) were associated with PDS. Moderate to severe antral atrophy and CagA positive strains were also more prevalent in PDS.

CONCLUSIONS

Different risk factors exist among FD subgroups based on the Rome III criteria, indicating distinct aetiopathogenesis of the subdivisions that may necessitate different therapeutic strategies.

Mosapride treatment for functional dyspepsia: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the therapeutic effect of mosapride in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mosapride for the treatment of FD performed between 2002 and 2013 were identified from databases. Symptom response rates were extracted and analyzed using risk ratios (RRs). A random effect model was applied based on Higgins I(2) tests. Publication bias was evaluated using a funnel plot, Egger's test, trim and fill, and the rank correlation test.

RESULTS

In total, 13 RCTs, which included 1091 mosapride-treated patients and 1129 control patients (on placebo or other drugs), were identified and analyzed. Overall, mosapride showed an RR of 0.999 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.869-1.150, P = 0.992) for improving global efficacy or symptom-based scores. In a sensitivity analysis of the high-quality RCTs, mosapride showed an RR of 1.114 (95% CI: 1.011-1.227, P = 0.029). However, in the studies using the Rome III criteria for the diagnosis of FD, mosapride showed an RR of 0.906 (95% CI: 0.807-1.016, P = 0.092). In the studies having funding source, mosapride showed an RR of 1.131 (95% CI: 1.028-1.244, P = 0.012), whereas an RR of 0.966 (95% CI: 0.896-1.042, P = 0.367) was observed in the studies without funding source. Publication bias was not detected.

CONCLUSION

In this analysis, we could not find a significant effect of mosapride on FD. Inconsistent diagnostic criteria for FD and different assessment outcomes are causes of heterogeneity. Further studies using common validated outcomes or questionnaires and high-quality RCTs will elucidate the real effect of this medication on FD.

Prevalence of uninvestigated dyspepsia and gastroesophageal reflux disease in Korea: a population-based study using the Rome III criteria

BACKGROUND/AIMS

There have been few population-based studies on the prevalences of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and dyspepsia using Rome III criteria in Asian countries.

METHODS

A population-based, cross-sectional study was conducted by telephone interviews of 5,000 Koreans between the ages of 20-69 years. Gastrointestinal symptoms were assessed by a translated Korean version of Rome III criteria. Uninvestigated dyspepsia (UID) was defined by symptom criteria of Rome III. GERD was defined by troublesome heartburn and/or acid regurgitation occurring at least once a week. The EQ5D assessment tool was used for the evaluation of quality of life.

RESULTS

The prevalences of UID, postprandial distress syndrome (PDS), and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) were 7.7, 5.6, and 4.2 %, respectively. Overlap between PDS and EPS was found in 27.1 % (104/384) of subjects with UID. There were no significant differences in demographic variables between patients with PDS and EPS. The prevalence of GERD was 7.1 %. Overlap between GERD and UID was found in 50.0 % of GERD patients. The EQ5D index of patients without either UID or GERD was 0.92 ± 0.07, and those of patients with only UID, with only GERD, and with both UID and GERD were 0.88 ± 0.09, 0.88 ± 0.11, and 0.84 ± 0.15, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

GERD and UID based on Rome III criteria were prevalent and significantly affected the quality of life in Korea. In Korean patients with UID, there was considerable overlap and there were no significant differences in demographic variables between PDS and EPS.

[Current issues in functional dyspepsia]

Functional dyspepsia is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders encountered in clinical practice. Functional dyspepsia is currently defined by Rome III criteria as the chronic dyspeptic symptoms (postprandial fullness, early satiety, epigastric pain or burning) in the absence of underling structural or metabolic disease that readily explain the symptoms. According to the Rome III consensus, functional dyspepsia can be subdivided into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS). Although the Rome III criteria have been published more than 8 years ago, not much effort has been put into validating these criteria and direct scientific evidence supporting the validity of the subdividing functional dyspepsia into PDS and EPS are lacking. This article is intended to review the validity of the Rome III criteria on the subdivisions of functional dyspepsia, i.e. PDS and EPS. The impact of sleep disorder, Helicobacter pylori-associated dyspepsia, and the emerging drug therapies in functional dyspepsia will also be discussed in this article.

Review article: adherence to Rome criteria in therapeutic trials in functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

The Rome criteria are currently required by health authorities for the inclusion of patients affected by functional dyspepsia in therapeutic trials. However, the degree of adherence to these criteria has not been formally verified.

AIM

To review adherence to the Rome criteria for inclusion criteria, outcome measures and endpoints in therapeutic trials on functional dyspepsia and the potential impact on the conclusions that can be drawn from these studies.

METHODS

A total of 1818 articles were screened. Fifty-eight trials claiming to include adults affected by functional dyspepsia as defined by the Rome criteria published as full articles in English between 2000 and 2013 were considered.

RESULTS

Lack of full adherence to the Rome criteria of inclusion criteria was found in 54% of the studies, due to inclusion of patients with symptoms not reported in the Rome criteria or definitions of dyspeptic symptom that varied from those proposed by the Rome criteria. Ninety-five per cent of clinical trials adopted therapeutic outcome measures that were not adherent to the Rome criteria, using questionnaires that did not include all dyspeptic symptoms or including symptoms other than those proposed by the Rome criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Stringent criteria have not been adopted for inclusion criteria and outcome measures in the vast majority of published studies on functional dyspepsia that claim to have been carried out according to the Rome criteria. Appropriate questionnaires should be developed to promote adherence to internationally accepted definitions of the syndrome in future studies.

Dyspepsia

Dyspepsia is a complex disorder with several distinct pathophysiologic mechanisms that are still poorly understood. Patients who experience dyspepsia have a high burden of disease, with significant personal and economic costs. Although serious pathology presenting as dyspepsia is rare, clinicians need to be aware of alarm features that should trigger prompt referral for subspecialty care. Those without alarm features can be managed in a rational way with either empiric antisecretory therapy, test-and-treat for H pylori eradication, antidepressants, and psychotherapy, or a combination of these. Given the heterogeneity of symptoms and large variability in response to different treatments, more research into specific pathophysiologic mechanisms will likely help guide diagnosis and treatment choices in the future.

Functional dyspepsia in children

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a widely prevalent problem in pediatrics, reportedly occurring in 3% to 27% of children and accounting for considerable impact on quality of life and health care costs. FD is defined by the Rome III classification as persistent upper abdominal pain or discomfort, not related to bowel movements, and without an organic cause, that is present for at least 2 months prior to diagnosis. Abnormal sensory perception, motor dysfunction, and psychosocial factors have been implicated in the causation of FD. Hypersensitivity to gastric distension, delayed gastric emptying, antral hypomotility, and gastric dysrhythmia are some abnormalities that have been noted in FD. Diagnosis of FD is based on a thorough history and examination, and an appropriate selection of tests based on clinical judgment, the presence of alarm signs, and response to treatment. A positive diagnosis of FD helps to shift focus from further testing to treatment of symptoms. The majority of children with dyspepsia do not have mucosal lesions on endoscopy; hence, endoscopy is not mandatory for the diagnosis of FD. Helicobacter pylori is an uncommon cause of dyspepsia in children, and test and treat strategy is discouraged. Delayed gastric emptying may be present in up to 70% of children with dyspepsia. A biopsychosocial approach to treatment involving medications, psychological and social supports, and complementary therapies is advocated. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and prokinetics are commonly used first-line medications. PPIs are preferred when epigastric pain is the predominant symptom, whereas prokinetics may be chosen when postprandial fullness or early satiety is the main symptom. PPIs may be more efficacious and cost-effective than H2 blockers according to adult data.

Efficacy of mosapride plus proton pump inhibitors for treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: A systematic review

AIM: To assess the potential benefits of mosapride plus proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

METHODS: A literature search was performed through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the ISI Web of Knowledge. The clinical trials that compared the benefit of mosapride plus PPI treatment with that of PPI monotherapy were analyzed. The rate of responders was evaluated by the pooled relative risk (PRR) and improvement in symptom scores was assessed by single effect size of a standardized mean, while Hedges’g was used as the effect size. Pooled effect sizes with 95%CIs were calculated using a fixed-effects model. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using Q test and I² analyses. In addition, studies that assessed the additional efficacy of mosapride in PPI-resistant patients were also reviewed.

RESULTS: This systematic review included information on a total of 587 patients based on 7 trials. Four trials compared the efficacy of combination therapy of mosapride plus a PPI with that of PPI monotherapy. The statistical analysis for the effect of additional mosapride showed equivocal results (PRR = 1.132; 95%CI: 0.934-1.372; P = 0.205; Hedges’g = 0.24; 95%CI: 0.03-0.46; P = 0.023). No heterogeneity and publication bias were found among the studies. Three open-labeled trials assessed the additional efficacy of mosapride in PPI-resistant patients. However, since these trials did not set the control group, the results may be considerably biased.

CONCLUSION: Mosapride combined therapy is not more effective than PPI alone as first-line therapy. Whether it is effective in PPI-resistant patients needs to be determined.

Functional dyspepsia--symptoms, definitions and validity of the Rome III criteria

Dyspepsia refers to a heterogeneous group of symptoms that are localized in the epigastric region. Typical dyspeptic symptoms include postprandial fullness, early satiation, epigastric pain and epigastric burning, but other upper gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea, belching or abdominal bloating often occur. Functional dyspepsia is defined as the presence of dyspeptic symptoms in the absence of an organic cause that readily explains them. The Rome III consensus proposed the subdivision of functional dyspepsia into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS), characterized by postprandial fullness and early satiation, and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS), characterized by epigastric pain or burning. Epidemiological studies in the USA and Europe confirmed the presence of both subgroups, with good separation between EPS and PDS. By contrast, other studies have found major overlap between EPS and PDS in patients with functional dyspepsia in specialist care centres in Europe and Asia. Preliminary pathophysiological studies suggest that PDS might be characterized by a higher prevalence of impaired gastric accommodation than EPS and raised duodenal eosinophil counts. Whether different treatment approaches are needed for EPS and PDS is currently unclear; only acotiamide, a new drug for the treatment of functional dyspepsia, has been found to be efficacious in PDS but not in EPS. Further randomized controlled trials testing treatment response by subgroup are urgently needed.

Can clinical features stratify use of endoscopy for dyspeptic patients with high background prevalence of upper gastrointestinal cancer?

BACKGROUND

Whether clinical features can stratify priority of endoscopy remains controversial for dyspeptic patients with high background prevalence of upper gastrointestinal cancer.

AIM

To examine the predictive performance of clinical features for cancerous lesions in dyspeptic patients in Taiwan.

METHODS

Between April 2008 and July 2009, 2530 consecutive dyspeptic outpatients underwent prospective evaluation with standardized questionnaire and then upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Performance of using age thresholds and alarm symptoms to predict malignancy was determined. Independent risk factors associated with malignancy and those with negative endoscopic findings were identified.

RESULTS

Malignant lesions were found in 31 patients (1.2%) and were independently associated with age, male gender, gastrointestinal bleeding, weight loss, and alcohol consumption. Any symptom of weight loss, bleeding and dysphagia, or simply age >45 years predicted 97% of cancer cases, with the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values being 96.8%, 29.3%, 1.7%, and 99.9%, respectively. This strategy achieved a low negative likelihood ratio (0.11) and a high diagnostic odds ratio (12.45). Negative endoscopic finding (n=1377, 54.4%) was independently associated with younger age, female gender, no use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, and no tobacco or alcohol consumption.

CONCLUSIONS

Absence of weight loss, dysphagia, and gastrointestinal bleeding predicts low likelihood of malignancy in dyspeptic Taiwanese patients aged <45 years.