Indian consensus statements on irritable bowel syndrome in adults: A guideline by the Indian Neurogastroenterology and Motility Association and jointly supported by the Indian Society of Gastroenterology

Overlap of 'disorders of gut-brain interaction' and their impact on quality of life and somatization in a tertiary care center- A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBIs) constitute a global health challenge. Overlapping DGBIs amplify the clinical severity and have a profound impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and somatization. Data on the prevalence and overlap of all individual DGBIs and their clinical ramifications remains limited. This study sought to elucidate these aspects within a northern Indian tertiary healthcare setting.

METHODS

This prospective cross-sectional study enrolled patients meeting Rome IV criteria for DGBIs and healthy controls (HC). Participants underwent elaborative assessments, including socio-demographic profiling, HRQoL evaluation (PROMIS Global-10) and somatization quantification (PHQ-12). Statistical analyses compared prevalence rates, overlap patterns and associated clinical outcomes between various groups.

RESULTS

Of the 2538 patients screened, 1044 (41.1%) with DGBIs (age 41.7 ± 12.6 years, 51.9% males) were enrolled; along with 1021 age and gender-matched HCs. Most common gastrointestinal region involved was gastroduodenal (49.9%), followed by bowel (39.7%) and esophageal (33.3%). Most common DGBIs were functional dyspepsia (FD; 44.4%), functional esophageal disorders (FEsD;32.4%), functional constipation (FC;18%), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS;16.1%). Overlapping DGBIs were present in 40.3% patients, with FD-FEsD (23.9%) and FD-FC(22.1%) and FD-IBS (52;12.4%) overlaps being the most common. Compared to HC, DGBI patients had significantly poorer HRQoL scores (19.1 ± 0.7 vs. 13.52 ± 3.39; p < 0.001) and significantly increased somatization scores (2.5 ± 1.7 vs. 18.5 ± 0.7; p < 0.001). Further, patients with overlapping DGBIs had significantly poorer HRQoL and significantly increased somatization scores compared to non-overlapping counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides novel data on the clinical burden and the entire spectrum of overlapping and non-overlapping DGBIs, while studying their impact on HRQoL and somatization. DGBI patients had significantly poorer HRQoL and heightened somatization compared to HCs; with further detriments observed in those with overlapping DGBIs. These findings emphasize the need for an integrated multidisciplinary approach for the evaluation of possible overlaps and for assessment of HRQoL in all patients with DGBIs to improve clinical outcomes.

Functional Foods and Nutraceuticals in Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common disorder of gut-brain interaction, with a multifactorial pathophysiology involving gut-brain axis dysregulation, visceral hypersensitivity, microbiota imbalance, and immune dysfunction. Traditional IBS management emphasizes dietary modifications and pharmacologic therapies. However, increasing attention has been directed toward functional foods, nutraceuticals, and herbal remedies due to their potential to target IBS pathophysiological mechanisms with favorable safety profiles. This clinical review explores the role of these adjunctive therapies, evaluating evidence from preclinical and clinical studies. Functional foods such as kiwifruit, prunes, and rye bread demonstrate benefits in bowel habit regulation through fiber content and microbiota modulation. Nutraceuticals like peppermint oil, palmitoylethanolamide, and herbal mixtures exhibit anti-inflammatory, antispasmodic, and analgesic effects. Prebiotics provide substrate-driven microbiota changes, although dosage is key, as given their fermentative properties, when used at high dosages, they can exacerbate symptoms in some individuals. Probiotics and postbiotics offer microbiota-based interventions with promising symptom relief in IBS subtypes, although factors for personalized treatment still need to be further elucidated. These strategies highlight a paradigm shift in IBS management, integrating diet-based therapies with evolving nutraceutical options to improve patient outcomes. Despite promising findings, challenges in standardizing definitions, mechanisms, and safety profiles still remain. Rigorous, large-scale trials to validate the therapeutic potential of these interventions are needed, to enhance the benefits of these compounds with an individualized treatment approach.

Non-pharmaceutical treatments for irritable bowel syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic disorder of gut-brain interaction that impacts a significant portion of the population and is associated with substantial morbidity, reduced quality of life, and economic impact globally. The pathophysiology of IBS is complex and incompletely understood, and the heterogeneity of IBS is reflected in the variety of pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical therapies utilized for the management of IBS. Given limitations with pharmaceutical treatments, many patients with IBS seek non-pharmaceutical options. Several non-pharmaceutical treatments such as the low FODMAP diet and brain-gut behavior interventions such as gut directed hypnosis and cognitive behavioral therapy are now considered standard of care and are part of all major guidelines for the treatment of IBS. However, challenges with access to and optimal implementation of these therapies remain. This review focuses on the current evidence for common non-pharmaceutical treatments for IBS, including the latest advances in dietary and brain-gut behavioral care, in addition other complementary and integrative health practices and emerging therapies.

Rome III and IV criteria are less discordant to diagnose irritable bowel syndrome in clinic patients than in community subjects

BACKGROUND

Though Rome IV criteria for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are less sensitive; they select Rome III patients with greater severity and consultation behavior. Since severity of IBS may determine consultation behavior, we compared Rome III and IV criteria in clinic patients and compared with earlier published data from Indian community hypothesizing that the diagnostic discordance between these criteria would be less in clinic than in community.

METHODS

Tertiary clinic patients were screened for IBS using Hindi translated-validated Rome III and IV questionnaires; IBS symptom severity scores (IBS-SSS) was also assessed. Diagnostic discordance between Rome III and IV criteria for IBS was compared with earlier published Indian community data.

RESULTS

Of 110 clinic patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders, 72 met IBS criteria (47 [42.7%], 22 [20%] and three [2.7%] both Rome III and IV criteria, Rome III criteria only and Rome IV criteria only, respectively). In contrast, of 40 IBS subjects from Indian community published earlier, nine (22.5%), 28 (70%) and three (7.5%) fulfilled both Rome III and IV, Rome III only, Rome IV only criteria, respectively. Clinic patients with IBS fulfilling both Rome III and IV criteria or Rome IV criteria had higher IBS-SSS than those fulfilling Rome III criteria only (295.3 ± 80.7 vs. 205.6 ± 65.7; p < 0.00001). This difference was primarily related to pain severity and number of days with pain.

CONCLUSION

Discordance between Rome IV and Rome III criteria in tertiary care clinic patients is less than in community subjects with IBS in India.

Hindi translation and validation of the English version of the gastrointestinal symptom rating scale questionnaire: An observational study

BACKGROUND

The gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS) is a questionnaire in English language which is designed to assess the clinical symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and peptic ulcer disease. This validated scale has questions on around 15 items and has been validated in patients with dyspepsia and IBS.

AIM

To translate and validate the English version of the GSRS questionnaire to the Hindi version.

METHODS

The purpose of the present work was to create a Hindi version of this questionnaire for use in the Indian population. The process involved various steps as per the World Health Organization methodology including initial forward translation, backward translation, and assessment by an expert committee. Initial pilot testing was followed by testing in healthy and diseased individuals.

RESULTS

The Hindi translation was pilot tested in 20 individuals and further validated in healthy controls (n = 30, 15 females) and diseased individuals (n = 72, 27 females). The diseased group included patients with functional dyspepsia and IBS. Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency on the final translated GSRS questionnaire was 0.715 which is considered adequate. Twelve questions significantly differentiated the diseased population from the healthy population (P value < 0.05) in the translated Hindi version of the GSRS.

CONCLUSION

The translated Hindi GSRS can be used to evaluate gastrointestinal function in clinical trials and community surveys in Hindi speaking populations.

Treating disorders of brain-gut interaction with multidisciplinary integrated care. Moving towards a new standard of care

Disorders of brain-gut interaction (DGBI) are highly prevalent in our community with a negative burden on the quality of life and function. Symptoms are frequently food-induced, and psychological disorders are commonly co-morbid and contribute greatly to symptom severity and healthcare utilization, which can complicate management. Pathophysiological contributors to the development and maintenance of DGBI are best appreciated within the biopsychosocial model of illness. Established treatments include medical therapies targeting gastrointestinal physiology, luminal microbiota or visceral sensitivity, dietary treatments including dietary optimization and specific therapeutic diets such as a low-FODMAP diet, and psychological interventions. The traditional "medical model" of care, driven predominantly by doctors, poorly serves sufferers of DBGI, with research indicating that a multidisciplinary, integrated-care approach produces better outcomes. This narrative review explores the current evidence for multidisciplinary care and provides the best practice recommendations for physicians and healthcare systems managing such patients.