Update on the Role of Rifaximin in Digestive Diseases

Various environmental factors affecting the human microbiota may lead to gut microbial imbalance and to the development of pathologies. Alterations of gut microbiota have been firmly implicated in digestive diseases such as hepatic encephalopathy, irritable bowel syndrome and diverticular disease. However, while these three conditions may all be related to dysfunction of the gut-liver-brain axis, the precise pathophysiology appears to differ somewhat for each. Herein, current knowledge on the pathophysiology of hepatic encephalopathy, irritable bowel syndrome, and diverticular disease are reviewed, with a special focus on the gut microbiota modulation associated with these disorders during therapy with rifaximin. In general, the evidence for the efficacy of rifaximin in hepatic encephalopathy appears to be well consolidated, although it is less supported for irritable bowel syndrome and diverticular disease. We reviewed current clinical practice for the management of these clinical conditions and underlined the desirability of more real-world studies to fully understand the potential of rifaximin in these clinical situations and obtain even more precise indications for the use of the drug.

Higher cardiovascular risk scores and liver fibrosis risk estimated by biomarkers in patients with metabolic-dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease

BACKGROUND

The definition of metabolic-dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) allows identification of metabolically complicated patients. Fibrosis risk scores are related to cardiovascular risk (CVR) scores and could be useful for the identification of patients at risk of systemic complications.

AIM

To evaluate the relationship between MAFLD and CVR using the Framingham risk score in a group of Mexican patients.

METHODS

Cross-sectional, observational and descriptive study carried out in a cohort of 585 volunteers in the state of Veracruz with MAFLD criteria. The risk of liver fibrosis was calculated with aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease score and fibrosis-4, as well as with transient hepatic elastography with Fibroscan^®. The CVR was determined by the Framingham system.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-five participants (21.4%) with MAFLD criteria were evaluated, average age 54.4 years, 63.2% were women, body mass index 32.3 kg/m². The Framingham CVR was high in 43 patients (33.9%). Transient elastography was performed in 55.2% of volunteers; 39.1% with high CVR and predominance in advanced fibrosis (F3–F4). The logistic regression analysis showed that liver fibrosis, diabetes and hypertension independently increased CVR.

CONCLUSION

One of every three patients with MAFLD had a high CVR, and in those with high fibrosis risk, the CVR risk was even greater.

Efficacy of i3.1 Probiotic on Improvement of Lactose Intolerance Symptoms: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trial

GOAL

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of probiotic i3.1 in improving lactose intolerance symptoms compared with placebo after 8 weeks of treatment.

BACKGROUND

Probiotics are promising strategies to prevent and improve lactose intolerance symptoms, but previous studies have provided conflicting results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This randomized, prospective, placebo-controlled study was conducted at the Hospital Juárez de México. We recruited adult patients with lactose intolerance confirmed by a lactose hydrogen breath test (LHBT) ≥20 parts per million (ppm) and a lactose intolerance symptom score ≥6 both upon lactose challenge. We compared the change from baseline in the scores of a validated symptom questionnaire and the LHBT after 8 weeks of probiotic or placebo treatment.

RESULTS

We included 48 patients: 33 receiving the probiotic and 15 receiving placebo (2:1 randomization). Demographic characteristics were homogeneous between groups. The reduction in total symptom score after a lactose challenge was significantly higher in the probiotic group versus the placebo group (-5.11 vs. -1.00; P<0.001). All the subscores significantly decreased from baseline in the probiotic group, except for vomiting, with significant differences between the probiotic and placebo groups for abdominal pain (P=0.045) and flatulence (P=0.004). The area under the curve of the LHBT was significantly reduced from baseline in the probiotic group (P=0.019), but differences between groups were not significant (P=0.621). Adverse events were mild without differences between groups, and no serious adverse event was registered.

CONCLUSION

The i3.1 probiotic was safe and efficacious in reducing lactose intolerance symptoms in patients with lactose intolerance, but did not change the LHBT.