The effects of levosulpiride on gastric and gall-bladder emptying in functional dyspepsia

Prokinetics-safety and efficacy: The European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility/The American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society expert review

BACKGROUND

Prokinetics are a class of pharmacological drugs designed to improve gastrointestinal (GI) motility, either regionally or across the whole gut. Each drug has its merits and drawbacks, and based on current evidence as high-quality studies are limited, we have no clear recommendation on one class or other. However, there remains a large unmet need for both regionally selective and/or globally acting prokinetic drugs that work primarily intraluminally and are safe and without systemic side effects.

PURPOSE

Here, we describe the strengths and weaknesses of six classes of prokinetic drugs, including their pharmacokinetic properties, efficacy, safety and tolerability and potential indications.

Lansoprazole plus levosulpiride versus esomeprazole in participants with gastroesophageal reflux disease and erosive esophagitis: a double blinded randomized control trial

Aim

The aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of lansoprazole plus levosulpiride over esomeprazole.

Methodology

This randomized control trial recruited 1000 participants having symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and erosive esophagitis and they were blindly randomized into two groups in a 1:1 ratio with appropriate concealment. Group 1 was given lansoprazole plus levosulpiride combination twice daily whereas group 2 was prescribed only esomeprazole twice daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was the healing of erosive esophagitis and GERD at week 49. Secondary assessments included improvement in quality of life. Participants' quality of life was assessed before starting the treatment and post-treatment using a short-form health survey questionnaire (SF-36).

Results

The lansoprazole plus levosulpiride group had significantly lower rates of positive postintervention GERD and erosive esophagitis status, and higher rates of sustained resolution of heartburn compared to the esomeprazole alone group. However, the lansoprazole plus levosulpiride group also had a higher risk of nausea.

Conclusion

Lansoprazole plus levosulpiride is a more effective and safe treatment for GERD than esomeprazole alone. Participants in the lansoprazole plus levosulpiride group showed a significantly higher rate of sustained resolution of GERD, lower rates of postintervention GERD and erosive esophagitis status, and a higher incidence of nausea compared to the esomeprazole alone group. Although quality of life worsened in both groups, adverse effects did not significantly differ. These findings strongly support the use of lansoprazole plus levosulpiride as a preferred treatment option for GERD and erosive esophagitis, which could have significant clinical implications for managing this common condition.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotropic drugs for functional dyspepsia in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

Psychotropic drugs are frequently used for functional dyspepsia (FD); however, the efficacy of these drugs for treating FD remains controversial. We aimed to comprehensively compare the relative efficacies of different psychotropic drugs for FD in adults.To conduct this study, we searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases on March 10, 2019, and conducted a frequentist network meta-analysis on the search results. The primary outcome was treatment efficacy estimated by the proportion of patients who achieved a certain percentage decrease in symptoms or who dropped below the threshold of the global FD symptom scores. The secondary outcome was acceptability, defined as all-cause discontinuation. Odds ratios (ORs) were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).We deemed 10 trials to be eligible for analysis, and these trials included 970 participants and 10 psychotropic drugs. Flupentixol + melitracen (F + M) (OR, 10.00; 95% CI, 1.59 to 62.73), tandospirone (3.24, 1.38 to 7.60), imipramine (2.21, 1.02 to 4.79), and amitriptyline (1.71, 1.06 to 3.09) were significantly superior to placebo. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, the most effective treatment was F + M (89.0%), whereas the least effective was R137696 (13.6%). In terms of acceptability, escitalopram (0.32, 0.11 to 0.92) was ranked as the worst drug (12.6%), followed by imipramine and sertraline.The present network meta-analysis suggests that F + M, tandospirone, imipramine, and amitriptyline are more effective than placebo as treatment for FD. Our results indicate that among the ten psychotropic drugs included, F + M is likely to be the most effective drug for alleviating dyspepsia symptoms.

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.

Epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and associations for symptom-based Rome IV functional dyspepsia in adults in the USA, Canada, and the UK: a cross-sectional population-based study

BACKGROUND

The population prevalence, clinical characteristics, and associations for Rome IV functional dyspepsia are not known. Following the publication of the Rome IV criteria for functional gastrointestinal disorders, we aimed to assess the prevalence, characteristics, and associations for symptom-based Rome IV functional dyspepsia in adults across the USA, Canada, and the UK.

METHODS

We sent an internet-based cross-sectional health survey to adults in the general population of three English-speaking countries: the USA, Canada, and the UK. We used quota-based sampling to generate demographically balanced and population-representative samples. Individuals were invited to complete an online questionnaire on general health, without mention that the purpose of this survey was to examine gastrointestinal symptoms. We excluded participants who failed two attention-test questions or were excessively inconsistent on the three gastrointestinal questions that were presented twice in the survey for this particular purpose. The survey enquired about demographics, health-care visits, medications, somatisation, quality of life, and symptom-based criteria for Rome IV functional dyspepsia as well as for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and functional heartburn. We made subsequent comparisons between participants with Rome IV functional dyspepsia and controls without dyspepsia. The primary objective was to identify participants who fulfilled symptom-based criteria for Rome IV functional dyspepsia and categorise them into postprandial distress syndrome, epigastric pain syndrome, or overlapping subtypes.

FINDINGS

6300 general population adults completed the health survey; 2100 each from the USA, Canada, and the UK. 369 responses were deemed inconsistent, leaving data for 5931 adults. Rome IV functional dyspepsia was significantly more prevalent in the USA (232 [12%] of 1949) than in Canada (167 [8%] of 1988) and the UK (152 [8%] of 1994; p<0·0001). The subtype distribution was 61% postprandial distress syndrome, 18% epigastric pain syndrome, and 21% overlapping variant with both syndromes; this pattern was similar across the countries. Participants with functional dyspepsia had significantly greater health impairment and health-care usage than those without dyspepsia. Participants with the overlapping variant showed greater somatisation and poorer quality-of-life scores than did individuals with either postprandial distress syndrome or epigastric pain syndrome alone. In multivariate analysis, independent factors associated with all functional dyspepsia subtypes included worsening quality of life and the presence of symptoms compatible with functional heartburn and IBS, with functional heartburn and IBS having the strongest association with overlapping postprandial distress syndrome and epigastric pain syndrome. Notably, somatisation showed a positive association with postprandial distress syndrome and the overlapping variant, and use of antidepressants showed a negative association with postprandial distress syndrome.

INTERPRETATION

Approximately 10% of the adult population fulfils symptom-based criteria for Rome IV functional dyspepsia and incurs considerable associated health impairment. The functional dyspepsia subtypes show differing associations, suggesting differences in pathophysiological processes or influences.

FUNDING

The Rome Foundation, the US National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the Swedish Medical Research Council, AFA Insurance, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, and the Faculty of Medicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Antianxiety and Antidepressive Agents for Functional Dyspepsia

Objective Functional dyspepsia (FD) is defined as persistent or recurrent pain or discomfort centered in the upper abdomen without organic disease. Psychosocial factors have been proposed as an important element in the pathophysiology of FD. Therefore, psychotropic agents having antianxiety or antidepressive action are expected to alleviate FD. We previously reported on the treatment of FD using such agents in a systematic review, wherein the effectiveness of the agents on FD was suggested, although there were several limitations. We searched for articles on this subject after our systematic review and re-reviewed them systematically. Methods Articles were searched for in MEDLINE from 2003 to 2014 using terms related to antianxiety or antidepressive agents. Clinical studies in which the effectiveness of such agents was clearly stated were selected from the retrieved articles. The newly selected and previously selected studies were combined, and statistical analyses were carried out. Results Nine studies were selected. Five of the studies indicated a significant symptomatic improvement using psychotropic drugs. A statistical analysis suggested a significant treatment effect of psychotropic agents having antianxiety or antidepressive action [pooled relative risk (PRR), 0.72; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.52-0.99; p=0.0406] but did not show a significant benefit of treatment with agents having an antidepressive action alone (PRR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.38-1.03; p=0.0665). Conclusion Our systematic review suggested that psychotropic drugs having antianxiety and antidepressive actions as a whole might be effective in alleviating FD symptoms, whereas those having only antidepressive action were not effective.

Efficacy of psychotropic drugs in functional dyspepsia: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a chronic gastroduodenal disorder. Individuals with FD demonstrate visceral hypersensitivity, abnormal central pain processing, and low mood, but it is unclear whether psychotropic drugs are an effective treatment for the condition. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DESIGN

MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMBASE Classic, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to June 2015) for RCTs recruiting adults with FD comparing psychotropic drugs with placebo. We contacted authors directly to maximise trial eligibility and minimise risk of bias for studies. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic after therapy, with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

The search identified 2795 citations; 13 RCTs (1241 patients) were eligible. Ten trials were at low risk of bias. The RR of FD symptoms not improving with psychotropic drugs versus placebo was 0.78 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.91) (number needed to treat=6; 95% CI 4 to 16). However, benefit was limited to antipsychotics and tricyclic antidepressants. When only studies that excluded individuals with coexistent mood disorder were considered, there was no benefit. Total numbers of adverse events and adverse events leading to withdrawal were significantly more common, with a number needed to harm of 21 for both.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychotropic drugs may be an effective treatment for FD, but the effect appears to be limited to antipsychotics and tricyclic antidepressants with fewer trials for other agents, meaning that firm conclusions for efficacy cannot be made. More data from high quality RCTs are required to support their use in the treatment of FD.

Interventions That Affect Gastrointestinal Motility in Hospitalized Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Randomized Trials

Gastrointestinal (GI) dysmotility is a common complication in acute, critically ill, postoperative, and chronic patients that may lead to impaired nutrient delivery, poor clinical, and patient-reported outcomes. Several pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions to treat GI dysmotility were investigated in dozens of clinical studies. However, they often yielded conflicting results, at least in part, because various (nonstandardized) definitions of GI dysmotility were used and methodological quality of studies was poor. While a universally accepted definition of GI dysmotility is yet to be developed, a systematic analysis of data derived from double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials may provide robust data on absolute and relative effectiveness of various interventions as the study outcome (GI motility) was assessed in the least biased manner.To systematically review data from double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials to determine and compare the effectiveness of interventions that affect GI motility.Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and EMBASE) were searched. A random effects model was used for meta-analysis. The summary estimates were reported as mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).A total of 38 double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials involving 2371 patients were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. These studies investigated a total of 20 different interventions, of which 6 interventions were meta-analyzed. Of them, the use of dopamine receptor antagonists (MD, -8.99; 95% CI, -17.72 to -0.27; P = 0.04) and macrolides (MD, -26.04; 95% CI, -51.25 to -0.82; P = 0.04) significantly improved GI motility compared with the placebo group. The use of botulism toxin significantly impaired GI motility compared with the placebo group (MD, 5.31; 95% CI, -0.04 to 10.67; P = 0.05). Other interventions (dietary factors, probiotics, hormones) did not affect GI motility.Based on the best available data and taking into account the safety profile of each class of intervention, dopamine receptor antagonists and macrolides significantly improve GI motility and are medications of choice in treating GI dysmotility.

Efficacy and tolerability of levosulipride, domperidone and metoclopramide in patients with non-ulcer functional dyspepsia: a comparative analysis

OBJECTIVE

This is a prospective, randomized study designed to demonstrate the efficacy of three study drugs (Levosulpiride, Domperidone and Metoclopramide) in Functional Dyspepsia. Subject recruitment was done from medicine outpatient department of the teaching hospital from June 2013 to November 2013.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data collection was performed by the Short-Form Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire (SF-LDQ) question instrument for assessing the dyspeptic symptoms of functional dyspepsia in patients enrolled in the study were assessed at base line (Prior to initiation of therapy) and at the next 4 weeks on a 5-point scale.

RESULT

Among 120 patients 113 patients completed this study in three groups (G-1 Levosulpiride 40 patients, G-2 Domperidone 35 patients and G-3 Metoclopramide 38 patients) were followed up. Female gender was dominated (75), occupation wise most of patients belong to laborer (49) class. Highly significant improvement in symptoms scale was noticed in G-1 Levosulpiride 40 patients' group.

CONCLUSION

Functional Gastrointestinal disorders are not serious ailments but have a key impact on quality of life. overall dyspeptic symptom relief rates were significantly high in the Levosulpiride group (p<0.004) as compare to Domperidone and Metoclopramide groups. A proper understanding of disease process by health care personnel and by sufferer is obligatory to enhance the quality of life and daunting the self/over the counter medication in this condition.

Effectiveness and safety of levosulpiride in the treatment of dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia

The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of levosulpiride in patients with dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia including nonerosive reflux esophagitis in conditions of daily practice. The study was conducted as a prospective, open-label, multicenter design in 342 patients with dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia (n=279) and nonerosive reflux disease (n=63), who received levosulpiride 25 mg 3 times daily orally for 4 weeks. Individual symptoms (pain/discomfort, fullness, bloating, early satiety, pyrosis, regurgitation, and nausea/vomiting) and a global symptom score were assessed at 15, 30, and 60 days after starting treatment. Adverse events also were recorded. There were 151 men and 191 women (mean age 38.8 years) who referred dyspeptic symptoms for a mean of 10.2 (10.7) months. A total of 66.4% patients were treated with 75 mg/day levosulpiride and 33.6% with 50 mg/day. At the 15-day visit, a decrease greater than 50% in the global symptom score was observed. The frequency and intensity of individual symptoms showed a statistically significant decrease (p<0.001) at all visits compared with baseline. At the 30-day visit, all symptoms had almost disappeared, a trend that was maintained until the last visit. Treatment with levosulpiride was well tolerated and only 40 adverse events were recorded (galactorrhea 26.7%, somnolence 17.8%, fatigue 11.1%, headache 11.5%) and no patient had to abandon the study due to side effects. In conclusion, levosulpiride is an effective and safe drug in the treatment of dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia and non-erosive reflux disease.

Standardized concept for the treatment of gastrointestinal dysmotility in critically ill patients--current status and future options

Inhibition of gastrointestinal motility is a major problem in critically ill patients. Motor stasis gives rise to subsequent complications including intolerance to enteral feeding, enhanced permeability of the atrophic intestinal mucosa and conditions as severe as systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis and multiple organ failure. Although the diagnosis of motility disturbances in critically ill patients is difficult, the type and site of the disturbance are important to consider in the analysis of the condition and in the choice of therapeutic approach. The pharmacological treatment of impaired gastrointestinal motility is difficult to handle for the clinician, because the underlying mechanisms are complex and not fully understood and the availability of pharmacological treatment options is limited. In addition, there is a lack of controlled studies on which to build an evidence-based treatment concept for critically ill patients. Notwithstanding this situation, there has been remarkable progress in the understanding of the integrated regulation of gastrointestinal motility in health and disease. These advances, which largely relate to the organization of the enteric nervous system and its signaling mechanisms, enable the intensivist to develop a standardized concept for the use of prokinetic agents in the treatment of impaired gastrointestinal motility in critically ill patients.

Promotility medications--now and in the future

Gastrointestinal promotility drugs stimulate smooth muscle contractions to enhance gastric emptying and small and large bowel transit. Currently available drug classes with prokinetic properties include antidopaminergic agents, serotonergic agents, and motilin-receptor agonists. Due to moderate prokinetic effects, poor symptomatic responses and the presence of adverse effects, there is a clear need for new classes of prokinetics. Several newer prokinetic drugs and drug classes are currently under evaluation. Selecting candidate agents and designing the appropriate therapeutic trials is hampered by the lack of insight in the pathophysiology of motility-related symptoms. As gastrointestinal motor disorders are chronic, relapsing, and remitting disorders, it seems desirable that studies with candidate prokinetic drugs establish a long-term efficacy and not only short-term effects on gastrointestinal functions.

Treatment of functional dyspepsia with antianxiety or antidepressive agents: systematic review

BACKGROUND

The pathophysiology of functional dyspepsia (FD) has not been elucidated precisely; accordingly, effective management of FD has not yet been found. Until now, treatment with antianxiety or antidepressive agents has been empirically applied; however, the efficacy of these treatments has not been established. We carried out this study to estimate the efficacy of these treatment approaches by systematically reviewing the literature concerning trials with agents that are efficacious against anxiety, neurosis, or depression.

METHODS

Articles were searched from the MEDLINE database up to October 2003, using the terms, "antianxiety agents", "antidepressants", and "dyspepsia", and from reference lists of published articles. Finally, studies in which the effectiveness of drugs was clearly stated were selected from the retrieved articles.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles, on 1717 patients, were selected from among 90 articles retrieved through our literature search. In 11 of the 13 studies, dyspeptic symptoms were improved significantly by treatment. Statistical analysis of 4 trials showed a significant benefit of treatment with antianxiety or antidepressive agents (pooled relative risk, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.85), although funnel plots were asymmetric.

CONCLUSIONS

Antianxiety or antidepressive agents may be effective in the treatment of FD patients, though further clinical trials are necessary.

Levosulpiride and cisapride in the treatment of dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia: a randomized, double-masked trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Levosulpiride is a benzamide derivate D(2) dopamine antagonist with prokinetic activity that can accelerate gastric emptying and reduce discomfort in response to gastric distention. The aim of the study is to compare the clinical efficacy of levosulpiride and cisapride in patients with dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia.

METHODS

In a exploratory pilot study performed as a multicenter, randomized, double-masked trial, the effects of 8 weeks of treatment with either levosulpiride, 25 mg, 3 times daily (n = 69) or cisapride, 10 mg, 3 times daily (n = 71) were compared. Individual symptoms (pain/discomfort, fullness, bloating, early satiety, and nausea/vomiting), global symptom score, effect on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and anxiety-state and anxiety-trait were evaluated. Adverse events also were recorded.

RESULTS

Both levosulpiride and cisapride improved dyspeptic symptoms and decreased total symptom score (79.9% and 71.3%, respectively); no significant statistical difference between treatments was found (P = 0.07 for total symptom score). HRQoL improved similarly after both treatments, whereas no change was observed in anxiety. Medication-related adverse effects were present in 13 of 69 patients (18.8%) in the levosulpiride group and 8 of 71 patients (11.3%) in the cisapride group. Significantly more (P = 0.03) patients treated with cisapride had to abandon the trial because of side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Levosulpiride is at least as effective as cisapride in the treatment of dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia.

New developments in the treatment of functional dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia is a clinical syndrome defined by chronic or recurrent pain or discomfort in the upper abdomen of unknown origin. Although generally accepted, investigators differently interpret this definition and clinical trials are often biased by inhomogeneous inclusion criteria. The poorly defined multifactorial pathogenesis of dyspeptic symptoms has hampered efforts to develop effective treatments. A general agreement exists on the irrelevant role played by Helicobacter pylori in the pathophysiology of functional dyspepsia. Gastric acid secretion is within normal limits in patients with functional dyspepsia but acid related symptoms may arise in a subgroup of them. Proton pump inhibitors appear to be effective in this subset of patients with dyspepsia. Non-painful dyspeptic symptoms are suggestive of underlying gastrointestinal motor disorders and such abnormalities can be demonstrated in a substantial proportion of patients. Postprandial fullness and vomiting have been associated with delayed gastric emptying of solids, and early satiety and weight loss to postcibal impaired accommodation of the gastric fundus. Prokinetics have been shown to exert beneficial effects, at least in some patients with dyspepsia. In contrast, drugs enhancing gastric fundus relaxation have been reported to improve symptoms, although conflicting results have also been published. An overdistended antrum may also generate symptoms, but its potential pathogenetic role and the effects of drugs on this abnormality have never been investigated formally. Visceral hypersensitivity plays a role in some dyspeptic patients and this abnormality is also a potential target for treatment. Both chemo- and mechanoreceptors can trigger hyperalgesic responses. Psychosocial abnormalities have been consistently found in functional digestive syndromes, including dyspepsia. Although useful in patients with irritable bowel syndromes (IBS), antidepressants have been only marginally explored in functional dyspepsia. Among the new potentially useful agents for the treatment of functional dyspepsia, serotonin 5-HT(4) receptor agonists have been shown to exert a prokinetic effect. Unlike motilides, 5-HT(4) receptor agonists do not appear to increase the gastric fundus tone and this may contribute to improve symptoms. 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists have been investigated mainly in the IBS and the few studies performed in functional dyspepsia have provided conflicting results. Also, kappa-opioid receptor agonists might be useful for functional digestive syndromes because of their antinociceptive effects, but available results in functional dyspepsia are scanty and inconclusive. Other receptors that represent potential clinical targets for antagonists include purinoceptors (i. e., P2X2/3 receptors), NMDA receptors (NR2B subtype), protease-activated receptor-2, the vanilloid receptor-1, tachykinin receptors (NK(1)/NK(2)) and cholecystokinin (CCK)(1) receptors.

Effect of acute and chronic levosulpiride administration on gastric tone and perception in functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Altered visceral perception is common in functional dyspepsia (FD). Dopaminergic pathways control gastrointestinal motility, but whether they modulate visceral sensitivity is unknown.

AIM

To investigate whether levosulpiride, a D2 antagonist, modulates gastric sensitivity and compliance in dyspeptic patients.

METHODS

Eight healthy subjects and 16 dyspeptic patients underwent graded gastric distensions using a tensostat. In dyspeptic patients the same isotonic distensions were repeated during either levosulpiride or saline administration. Eight FD patients were evaluated after 4-week treatment with oral levosulpiride. Gastrointestinal symptoms were evaluated using a 100 mm visual analogue score. Perception was scored on a scale of 0 to 6.

RESULTS

Although healthy subjects and FD patients had similar gastric compliance, FD patients tolerated lower tension levels. At the same distending tension levels, levosulpiride decreased gastric compliance and perception score (14 +/- 6% and 38 +/- 10% change, respectively; P < 0.05 vs. saline) only in FD patients. Isotonic distensions exhibited very reproducible perception. Chronic levosulpiride administration significantly reduced dyspeptic symptoms and increased discomfort threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with healthy subjects, FD patients show marked gastric hypersensitivity. In FD patients levosulpiride decreased the perception of gastric distension with an action unrelated to change of gastric tone. Chronic levosulpiride administration significantly ameliorates gastrointestinal symptoms and increases the discomfort threshold.

Comparative effects of levosulpiride and cisapride on gastric emptying and symptoms in patients with functional dyspepsia and gastroparesis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of several prokinetic drugs on dyspeptic symptoms and on gastric emptying rates are well-established in patients with functional dyspepsia, but formal studies comparing different prokinetic drugs are lacking.

AIM

To compare the effects of chronic oral administration of cisapride and levosulpiride in patients with functional dyspepsia and delayed gastric emptying.

METHODS

In a double-blind crossover comparison, the effects of a 4-week administration of levosulpiride (25 mg t.d.s.) and cisapride (10 mg t.d.s.) on the gastric emptying rate and on symptoms were evaluated in 30 dyspeptic patients with functional gastroparesis. At the beginning of the study and after levosulpiride or cisapride treatment, the gastric emptying time of a standard meal was measured by 13C-octanoic acid breath test. Gastrointestinal symptom scores were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The efficacy of levosulpiride was similar to that of cisapride in significantly shortening (P < 0.001) the t1/2 of gastric emptying. No significant differences were observed between the two treatments with regards to improvements in total symptom scores. However, levosulpiride was significantly more effective (P < 0.01) than cisapride in improving the impact of symptoms on the patients' every-day activities and in improving individual symptoms such as nausea, vomiting and early postprandial satiety.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of levosulpiride and cisapride in reducing gastric emptying times with no relevant side-effects is similar. The impact of symptoms on patients' everyday activities and the improvement of some symptoms such as nausea, vomiting and early satiety was more evident with levosulpiride than cisapride.

A systematic overview of the use of diary cards, quality-of-life questionnaires, and psychometric tests in treatment trials of Helicobacter pylori-positive and -negative non-ulcer dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to evaluate the use of diary cards, quality-of-life questionnaires, and psychometric tests in treatment trials of non-ulcer dyspepsia.

METHODS

Data sources were a Medline search (up to 1966) and a manual search of five gastrointestinal journals (up to 1980) for original, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials with at least 20 patients which evaluated treatment regimens for non-ulcer dyspepsia.

RESULTS

Of the 67 eligible studies, 31 used diary cards. Diary cards were used alone in 15 of the 31 studies (48%), whereas the others (52%) also used a physician assessment. The symptoms assessed by diary cards were epigastric pain (100%), nausea/vomiting (65%), heartburn (52%), belching (39%), regurgitation (29%), fullness (29%), and bloating (23%). Forty-five per cent also recorded antacid use. Severity of outcome measures was assessed by a visual analogue scale in 5 of the 31 studies (16%), Likert scales in 17 studies (55%), and unclear methods in 3 studies (10%). For statistical analysis daily averages of symptoms were used in 5 of the 31 studies (16%), weekly averages in 11 studies (35%), and 2-week intervals during the treatment period in the rest, with some studies using a combination (such as daily and weekly averages). Only 3 of the 31 studies (8%) checked for compliance with diary card data. None of the studies mention anything about missing data and how this was handled. One study evaluated quality of life questionnaires and one evaluated a psychometric test.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-ulcer dyspepsia treatment trials frequently use diary cards but need to be much clearer about how information was obtained and how it was used in the statistical analysis. Not much information is available to comment on the use of quality-of-life questionnaires or psychometric tests for evaluation of outcome measures.

Management of gastrointestinal motility disorders. A practical guide to drug selection and appropriate ancillary measures

The focus of management of gastrointestinal motility disorders should be to improve survival and quality of life. Some motor disorders are annoying, but are compatible with virtually normal activity and carry no significant life risk. Conversely, other motor disorders are highly incapacitating and may shorten life expectancy because of complications and nutritional impairment. Management is based first on establishing the correct diagnosis and prognosis; secondly, on adjusting therapy to the severity of illness; and thirdly, on preventing significant complications. Simple recommendations on appropriate changes in lifestyle and reassurance may suffice in mild cases. Pharmacological therapy and, exceptionally, surgical or nutritional measures may be required in other patients. Generally, pharmacological agents should be directed towards correcting specific pathophysiological abnormalities, but this is not always possible. Symptomatic relief may be achieved on an empirical basis. Long term treatment may often require the combination of different therapeutic approaches either sequentially or simultaneously.