Pharmacological interventions for non-ulcer dyspepsia

Choosing an Animal Model for the Study of Functional Dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common functional gastrointestinal disorder with pain or discomfort in the upper abdomen as the main characteristic. The prevalence of FD worldwide varies between 5% and 11%. This condition adversely affects attendance and productivity in the workplace. Emerging evidence is beginning to unravel the pathophysiologies of FD, and new data on treatment are helping to guide evidence-based practice. In order to better understand the pathophysiologies of FD and explore better treatment options, various kinds of animal models of FD have been developed. However, it is unclear which of these models most closely mimic the human disease. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the currently available animal models of FD in relationship to the clinical features of the disease. The rationales, methods, merits, and disadvantages for modelling specific symptoms of FD are discussed in detail.

The Indications, Applications, and Risks of Proton Pump Inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are the most effective drugs for inhibiting gastric acid secretion. They have been in clinical use for more than 25 years, In 2014, 3.475 billion daily defined doses (DDD) of PPI were prescribed in Germany. This high number alone calls for a critical analysis of the spectrum of indications for PPI and their potential adverse effects.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases, with particular emphasis on randomized, prospective multicenter trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

The inhibition of gastric acid secretion with PPI is successfully used for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease and of gastric and duodenal ulcers, for the secondary prevention of gastroduodenal lesions that have arisen under treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetylsalicylic acid, and for the prevention of recurrent hemorrhage from ulcers after successful endoscopic hemostasis. PPI are given along with practically all antibiotic regimens for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection. The number of prescriptions for PPI has risen linearly over the past 25 years. As there has been no broadening of indications, one may well ask whether the current, extensive use of PPI is justified. There is evidence that patients taking PPI are at greater risk for fractures. Moreover, the vitamin B12 level should be checked occasionally in all patients taking PPI.

CONCLUSION

PPI are among the more effective drugs for the treatment of diseases associated with gastric acid. In view of their cost and potential adverse effects, they should only be prescribed for scientifically validated indications.

Medical treatment of functional dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a condition in which upper abdominal symptoms, such as epigastralgia, postprandial discomfort, and bloating, occur in the absence of any organic or metabolic disease that could explain the symptoms. The prevalence of FD is increasing, presumably because of an increasingly stressful environment, as well as overlap with other motility disorders such as gastroesophageal reflux diseases and irritable bowel syndrome. Numerous studies have attempted to determine the pathophysiological mechanisms of FD and establish effective FD treatment, with little success. Several therapeutic options have been explored, including Helicobacter pylori eradication, proton pump inhibitors, prokinetic agents, anti-depressant and anxiolytic agents, and acotiamide, a recent emerging drug. Through the many trials evaluating the efficacy of drugs for FD treatment, we found that it is necessary to treat according to the symptoms of FD and to use a combination of therapeutic options. Additional well-designed, prospective studies are needed to confirm the management of FD.

Repeat upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with functional dyspepsia: yield, findings, and predictors of positive findings

Background. No guideline on repeat esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in functional dyspepsia (FD) exists. This study aimed to define yield, findings, and predictors of positive findings on repeat EGD in FD. Methods. FD patients who underwent at least 2 EGDs during October 2005 to November 2011 were enrolled and reviewed. Yield and findings were analyzed and univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of positive repeat EGD. Results. The median time to repeat EGD was 34 months. Among 146 patients, 115 patients (79%) had negative and 31 (21%) had positive repeat EGD, including erosive gastritis (13.0%), peptic ulcer (7.5%), reflux esophagitis (1.4%), and Barrett's esophagus (0.7%). Four independent predictors of positive repeat EGD were smoking (HR 3.88, 95% CI 1.31-11.51, P = 0.015), hypertension (HR 2.96, 95% CI 1.38-6.36, P = 0.050), history of malignancies (HR 3.65, 95% CI 1.16-11.46, P = 0.027), and antiplatelets or NSAIDs used within 4 weeks (HR 4.10, 95% CI 1.13-14.90, P = 0.032), while alarm features or failure to treatment did not predict positive repeat EGD.  Conclusion. Yield of repeat EGD in FD was substantially low, all findings were acid-related disorders, and there was no malignancy. Smoking, hypertension, history of malignancies, and antiplatelets/NSAIDs use associated with positive repeat EGD.

Investigating functional dyspepsia in Asia

The diagnosis of functional dyspepsia (FD) is challenging since it depends largely on symptoms which are often heterogeneous and overlapping. This is particularly so in Asia with many different cultures and languages. Symptom-based diagnosis of FD based on Rome III criteria has not been fully validated and it may not be suitable in some Asian populations. Clinicians often assume that investigations in FD are not rewarding and physiological tests are often not available unless in the research setting. Investigation of alarm features and role of Helicobacter pylori in FD remain controversial but experts agreed that both should be tested. Physiological tests including gastric accommodation and chemical hypersensitivity tests are underutilized in Asia and available studies were few. While experts do not recommend routine clinical use of gastric accommodation tests but they agree that these tests can be advocated if clinically indicated. Empiric therapeutic trial is not currently a diagnostic option. The pathogenesis of FD is still poorly understood and there is a substantial placebo response. As a conclusion, a diagnosis of FD is challenging especially so in the context of Asia and despite the limitations of available physiological tests experts agreed that these tests can be advocated if and when clinically indicated.

Mangiferin, a natural xanthone, accelerates gastrointestinal transit in mice involving cholinergic mechanism

AIM: To investigate the effects of mangiferin on gastrointestinal transit (GIT) in normal and constipated mice, together with the possible mechanism.

METHODS: Intragastrically-administered charcoal meal was used to measure GIT in overnight starved Swiss mice. In the first experiments, mangiferin (3 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, 30 mg/kg, and 100 mg/kg, po) or tegaserod (1 mg/kg, ip) were administered 30 min before the charcoal meal to study their effects on normal transit. In the second series, mangiferin (30 mg/kg) was tested on delayed GIT induced by several different pharmacological agonists (morphine, clonidine, capsaicin) or antagonists (ondansetron, verapamil, and atropine) whereas in the third series, mangiferin (30 mg/kg, 100 mg/kg and 300 mg/kg) or tegaserod (1 mg/kg) were tested on 6 h fecal pellets outputted by freely fed mice. The ratio of wet to dry weight was calculated and used as a marker of fecal water content.

RESULTS: Mangiferin administered orally significantly (P < 0.05) accelerated GIT at 30 mg/kg and 100 mg/kg (89% and 93%, respectively), similarly to 5-hydroxytryptamine₄ (5-HT₄) agonist tegaserod (81%) when compared to vehicle-treated control (63%). Co-administered mangiferin (30 mg/kg) totally reversed the inhibitory effect of opioid agonist morphine, 5-HT₃-receptor antagonist ondansetron and transient receptor potential vanilloid-1 receptor agonist capsaicin on GIT, but only to a partial extent with the GIT-delay induced by α₂-adrenoceptor agonist clonidine, and calcium antagonist verapamil. However, co-administered atropine completely blocked the stimulant effect of mangiferin on GIT, suggesting the involvement of muscarinic acetylcholine receptor activation. Although mangiferin significantly enhanced the 6 h fecal output at higher doses (245.5 ± 10.43 mg vs 161.9 ± 10.82 mg and 227.1 ± 20.11 mg vs 161.9 ± 10.82 mg of vehicle-treated control, at 30 and 100 mg/kg, P < 0.05, respectively), the effect of tegaserod was more potent (297.4 ± 7.42 mg vs 161.9 ± 10.82 mg of vehicle-treated control, P < 0.05). Unlike tegaserod, which showed an enhanced water content in fecal pellets (59.20% ± 1.09% vs 51.44% ± 1.19% of control, P < 0.05), mangiferin evidenced no such effect, indicating that it has only a motor and not a secretomotor effect.

CONCLUSION: Our data indicate the prokinetic action of mangiferin. It can stimulate the normal GIT and also overcome the drug-induced transit delay, via a cholinergic physiological mechanism.

Comparison of PPIs and H2-receptor antagonists plus prokinetics for dysmotility-like dyspepsia

AIM: To compare efficacy of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) with H₂-receptor antagonists (H₂RAs) plus prokinetics (Proks) for dysmotility-like symptoms in functional dyspepsia (FD).

METHODS: Subjects were randomized to receive open-label treatment with either rabeprazole 10 mg od (n = 57) or famotidine 10 mg bid plus mosapride 5 mg tid (n = 57) for 4 wk. The primary efficacy endpoint was change (%) from baseline in total dysmotility-like dyspepsia symptom score. The secondary efficacy endpoint was patient satisfaction with treatment.

RESULTS: The improvement in dysmotility-like dyspepsia symptom score on day 28 was significantly greater in the rabeprazole group (22.5% ± 29.2% of baseline) than the famotidine + mosapride group (53.2% ± 58.6% of baseline, P < 0.0001). The superior benefit of rabeprazole treatment after 28 d was consistent regardless of Helicobacter pylori status. Significantly more subjects in the rabeprazole group were satisfied or very satisfied with treatment on day 28 than in the famotidine + mosapride group (87.7% vs 59.6%, P = 0.0012). Rabeprazole therapy was the only significant predictor of treatment response (P < 0.0001), defined as a total symptom score improvement ≥ 50%.

CONCLUSION: PPI monotherapy improves dysmotility-like symptoms significantly better than H₂RAs plus Proks, and should be the treatment of first choice for Japanese FD.

Evaluation and management of dyspepsia

Dyspepsia is a common clinical problem seen by both primary care physicians and gastroenterologists. Initial evaluation should focus on the identification and treatment of potential causes of symptoms such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), peptic ulcer disease, and medication side effects but also on recognizing those at risk for more serious conditions such as gastric cancer. This manuscript discusses the evaluation and management of dyspepsia including the role of proton-pump inhibitors, treatment of Helicobacter pylori, and endoscopy. Finally, treatment of refractory functional dyspepsia is addressed.

WITHDRAWN: Initial management strategies for dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

This review considers management strategies (combinations of initial investigation and empirical treatments) for dyspeptic patients. Dyspepsia was defined to include both epigastric pain and heartburn.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness, acceptability, and cost effectiveness of the following initial management strategies for patients presenting with dyspepsia (a) Initial pharmacological therapy (including endoscopy for treatment failures). (b) Early endoscopy. (c) Testing for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori )and endoscope only those positive. (d) H. pylori eradication therapy with or without prior testing.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were located through electronic searches and extensive contact with trialists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials of dyspeptic patients presenting in primary care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected on dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life and use of resources. An individual patient data meta-analysis of health economic data was conducted

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five papers reporting 27 comparisons were found. Trials comparing proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with antacids (three trials) and histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) (three trials), early endoscopy with initial acid suppression (five trials), H. pylori test and endoscope versus usual management (three trials), H. pylori test and treat versus endoscopy (six trials), and test and treat versus acid suppression alone in H. pylori positive patients (four trials), were pooled. PPIs were significantly more effective than both H2RAs and antacids. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were; for PPI compared with antacid 0.72 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.80), PPI compared with H2RA 0.63 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.85). Results for other drug comparisons were either absent or inconclusive. Initial endoscopy was associated with a small reduction in the risk of recurrent dyspeptic symptoms compared with H. pylori test and treat (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96), but was not cost effective (mean additional cost of endoscopy US$401 (95% CI $328 to 474). Test and treat may be more effective than acid suppression alone (RR 0.59 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Proton pump inhibitor drugs (PPIs) are effective in the treatment of dyspepsia in these trials which may not adequately exclude patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). The relative efficacy of histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) and PPIs is uncertain. Early investigation by endoscopy or H. pylori testing may benefit some patients with dyspepsia but is not cost effective as part of an overall management strategy.

Management of functional somatic syndromes

Although functional somatic syndromes (FSS) show substantial overlap, treatment research is mostly confined to single syndromes, with a lack of valid and generally accepted diagnostic criteria across medical specialties. Here, we review management for the full variety of FSS, drawn from systematic reviews and meta-analyses since 2001, and give recommendations for a stepped care approach that differentiates between uncomplicated and complicated FSS. Non-pharmacological treatments involving active participation of patients, such as exercise and psychotherapy, seem to be more effective than those that involve passive physical measures, including injections and operations. Pharmacological agents with CNS action seem to be more consistently effective than drugs aiming at restoration of peripheral physiological dysfunction. A balance between biomedical, organ-oriented, and cognitive interpersonal approaches is most appropriate at this truly psychosomatic interface. In view of the iatrogenic component in the maintenance of FSS, doctor-centred interventions and close observation of the doctor-patient relationship are of particular importance.

Recent insights into digestive motility in functional dyspepsia

Functional gastrointestinal disorders, such as functional dyspepsia (FD) and irritable bowel syndrome, are common pathologies of the gut. FD is a clinical syndrome defined as chronic or recurrent pain or discomfort of unknown origin in the upper abdomen. The pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for FD have not been fully elucidated, but new ideas regarding its pathophysiology and the significance of the pathophysiology with respect to the symptom pattern of FD have emerged. In particular, there is growing interest in alterations in gastric motility, such as accommodation to a meal or gastric emptying, and visceral sensation in FD. The mechanisms underlying impaired gastroduodenal motor function are unclear, but possible factors include abnormal neurohormonal function, autonomic dysfunction, visceral hypersensitivity to acid or mechanical distention, Helicobacter pylori infection, acute gastrointestinal infection, psychosocial comorbidity, and stress. Although the optimum treatment for FD is not yet clearly established, acid-suppressive drugs, prokinetic agents, eradication of H. pylori, and antidepressants have been widely used in the management of patients with FD. The therapeutic efficacy of prokinetics such as itopride hydrochloride and mosapride citrate in the treatment of FD is supported by the results of relatively large and well-controlled studies. In addition, recent research has yielded new therapeutic agents and modalities for dysmotility in FD, including agonists/antagonists of various sensorimotor receptors, activation of the nitrergic pathway, kampo medicine, acupuncture, and gastric electric stimulation. This review discusses recent research on the pathophysiology of and treatment options for FD, with special attention given to digestive dysmotility.

Helicobacter pylori eradication versus prokinetics in the treatment of functional dyspepsia: a randomized, double-blind study

BACKGROUND

This randomized, double-blind study compared the efficacy of Helicobacter pylori eradication against prokinetics in H. pylori-infected functional dyspepsia patients.

METHODS

Patients with moderately severe or severe dyspepsia fulfilling the Rome II criteria were randomized to either H. pylori eradication for 1 week and 6 weeks of placebo prokinetics or 6 weeks of prokinetics and placebo H. pylori eradication in the first week. Symptoms were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 months using the Glasgow Dyspepsia Severity Score (GDSS). Global response to treatment was assessed at 12 months.

RESULTS

Altogether 130 patients were enrolled (H. pylori eradication, 71; prokinetics, 59). The mean baseline GDSS was 9.3 for the H. pylori eradication group and 8.9 for the prokinetic group. At 6 months, the score was 3.6 and 4.1, respectively, and it remained at 3.5 and 3.8, respectively, at 12 months. With H. pylori eradication, 31.0% had complete symptom resolution (GDSS 0 or 1) at 12 months compared with 23.7% with prokinetics (a nonsignificant difference). At 12 months, global symptomatic improvement was seen in 62.0% of the H. pylori eradication group compared with 67.8% of the prokinetics group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both H. pylori eradication and prokinetic therapy resulted in symptom improvement in two-thirds of dyspeptic patients at 1 year. More patients tended to achieve complete symptom relief with H. pylori eradication.

Therapeutic strategies for functional dyspepsia and the introduction of the Rome III classification

Although placebo response rates in clinical trials for functional dyspepsia (FD) are more than 30%, a recent meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that antisecretory drugs were more or less superior to placebos. On the other hand, large-scale RCTs on the efficacy of treatment with prokinetics on FD are still needed. Indications for antibiotic eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori-positive FD are still controversial, but there seems to be a small but significant therapeutic gain achieved with H. pylori eradication. Since preprandial and postprandial symptomatic disturbances are very important targets for FD treatment, ghrelin, a novel appetite-promoting gastrointestinal peptide that also promotes gastric motility or basal acid secretion can be expected to be a therapeutic target. In the recently published Rome III classification, FD is redefined for patients with symptoms thought to originate from the gastroduodenal region, specifically epigastric pain or burning, postprandial fullness, or early satiation, and it is divided into the subcategories postprandial distress syndrome and epigastric pain syndrome. These new criteria are of value in clinical practice, for epidemiological, pathophysiological, and clinical research, and for the development of new therapeutic strategies.

Treatment of functional dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common reason a patient presents with upper gastrointestinal symptoms for medical care. Although treatment of FD remains expensive, the agents are rarely used in a systematic manner; the majority of treatments are empirical and the results short lived once therapy is ceased. This is partly due to the lack of consistent pathophysiologic markers in FD, so therapy is symptom driven. This review appraises the best evidence on available interventions. A structured scheme for deciding on appropriate therapies is to consider the possible putative pathophysiologic mechanisms. Eradicating Helicobacter pylori, if present, is a first-line strategy. In patients who have symptoms suggesting excessive gastric acid secretion, particularly epigastric pain, antisecretory agents are recommended. Prokinetics may confer benefits on symptoms suggestive of upper gastrointestinal dysmotility, like fullness or early satiety. However, their use is limited due to availability issues. The expanding field of psychologic therapies provides a promising avenue of treatment. Complementary medicines are now widely use and their benefits have been suggested in recent controlled trials. Emerging treatments include cholecystokinin 1 blockers, opioid receptor agonists, and serotonergic agents, although their application in FD is in the preliminary stages.

Initial management strategies for dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

This review considers management strategies (combinations of initial investigation and empirical treatments) for dyspeptic patients. Dyspepsia was defined to include both epigastric pain and heartburn.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness, acceptability, and cost effectiveness of the following initial management strategies for patients presenting with dyspepsia: (a) Initial pharmacological therapy (including endoscopy for treatment failures). (b) Early endoscopy. (c) Testing for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori )and endoscope only those positive. (d) H. pylori eradication therapy with or without prior testing.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were located through electronic searches and extensive contact with trialists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials of dyspeptic patients presenting in primary care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected on dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life and use of resources. An individual patient data meta-analysis of health economic data was conducted

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five papers reporting 27 comparisons were found. Trials comparing proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with antacids (three trials) and histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) (three trials), early endoscopy with initial acid suppression (five trials), H. pylori test and endoscope versus usual management (three trials), H. pylori test and treat versus endoscopy (six trials), and test and treat versus acid suppression alone in H. pylori positive patients (four trials), were pooled. PPIs were significantly more effective than both H2RAs and antacids. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were; for PPI compared with antacid 0.72 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.80), PPI compared with H2RA 0.63 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.85). Results for other drug comparisons were either absent or inconclusive. Initial endoscopy was associated with a small reduction in the risk of recurrent dyspeptic symptoms compared with H. pylori test and treat (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96), but was not cost effective (mean additional cost of endoscopy US$401 (95% CI $328 to 474). Test and treat may be more effective than acid suppression alone (RR 0.59 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Proton pump inhibitor drugs (PPIs) are effective in the treatment of dyspepsia in these trials which may not adequately exclude patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). The relative efficacy of histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) and PPIs is uncertain. Early investigation by endoscopy or H. pylori testing may benefit some patients with dyspepsia but is not cost effective as part of an overall management strategy.

Managing dyspepsia without alarm signs in primary care: new national guidance for England and Wales

AIM

To report new recommendations for the primary care management of dyspepsia without alarm signs in England and Wales.

METHOD

An independent, representative group of health care professionals, patient representatives and researchers developed the guideline using evidence-based and small group-working principles, and incorporated extensive peer-reviewing and feedback from stakeholder organizations.

RESULTS

Referral to investigate dyspepsia should be made for alarm signs and not on the basis of age alone, reflecting the balance of benefit and harm from endoscopy. Empirical management without formal diagnosis is appropriate for most patients: reviewing patient history, lifestyle, over-the-counter medicines, and providing a course of proton-pump inhibitors and/or Helicobacter pylori test and treatment. Patients with ongoing symptoms require at least annual review to discuss symptoms and lifestyle, and as appropriate, encourage stepping down prescribed medication and returning to self-care. A new strategy included in the step down process is the use of therapies 'on-demand'.

CONCLUSION

The guideline provides structured and supported recommendations for both undiagnosed and endoscopically investigated dyspepsia. Some favour increased investigation to detect Barrett's oesophagus and carcinoma. However, there is inconclusive evidence that patients without alarm signs will benefit subsequently from endoscopy, while investigation involves a small but real risk of harm.