Being constipated: A bad omen for your cardiovascular system?

Constipation in adults

.

Usefulness of Bisacodyl Testing on Therapeutic Outcomes in Refractory Constipation

BACKGROUND

Although chronically constipated patients usually respond to medical treatment, there is a subgroup with scarce/no response, generally labeled as refractory or intractable. However, whether this lack of response is real or due to ancillary causes (suboptimal dosage, lack of compliance etc.) is unknown.

AIMS

To see whether a pharmacologic test (bisacodyl colonic intraluminal infusion during manometric assessment) may predict the therapeutic outcome.

METHODS

Data of patients undergoing 24/h colonic manometry for severe intractable constipation in whom the bisacodyl test (10 ml of drug dissolved into saline and injected through the more proximal recording port) had been carried out were retrieved and analysed, and correlations with the therapeutic outcome made.

RESULTS

Overall, charts from 38 patients (5 men) were available; of these, only 21% displayed naive high-amplitude propagated contractions (average, less than 2/24 h), mostly meal-induced, during the recordings. A bisacodyl response was present in 31.6% patients, with a mean number of events of 1.8 per patient. After bisacodyl testing, 47.3% patients underwent intensive medical treatment, 44.7% surgery (medical failures), and 8% transanal irrigation, a procedure employed to treat refractory patients. The presence of naive propulsive contractions significantly correlated with the response to bisacodyl infusion (p < 0.0001), and with a favourable outcome to intensive medical treatment (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The bisacodyl test may be clinically useful to better categorize constipated patients erroneously labelled as intractable and to exclude true colonic inertia, thus avoiding surgery in more than 30% of these subjects.

Chronic constipation diagnosis and treatment evaluation: the "CHRO.CO.DI.T.E." study

BACKGROUND

According to Rome criteria, chronic constipation (CC) includes functional constipation (FC) and irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). Some patients do not meet these criteria (No Rome Constipation, NRC). The aim of the study was is to evaluate the various clinical presentation and management of FC, IBS-C and NRC in Italy.

METHODS

During a 2-month period, 52 Italian gastroenterologists recorded clinical data of FC, IBS-C and NRC patients, using Bristol scale, PAC-SYM and PAC-QoL questionnaires. In addition, gastroenterologists were also asked to record whether the patients were clinically assessed for CC for the first time or were in follow up. Diagnostic tests and prescribed therapies were also recorded.

RESULTS

Eight hundred seventy-eight consecutive CC patients (706 F) were enrolled (FC 62.5%, IBS-C 31.3%, NRC 6.2%). PAC-SYM and PAC-QoL scores were higher in IBS-C than in FC and NRC. 49.5% were at their first gastroenterological evaluation for CC. In 48.5% CC duration was longer than 10 years. A specialist consultation was requested in 31.6%, more frequently in IBS-C than in NRC. Digital rectal examination was performed in only 56.4%. Diagnostic tests were prescribed to 80.0%. Faecal calprotectin, thyroid tests, celiac serology, breath tests were more frequently suggested in IBS-C and anorectal manometry in FC. More than 90% had at least one treatment suggested on chronic constipation, most frequently dietary changes, macrogol and fibers. Antispasmodics and psychotherapy were more frequently prescribed in IBS-C, prucalopride and pelvic floor rehabilitation in FC.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBS-C reported more severe symptoms and worse quality of life than FC and NRC. Digital rectal examination was often not performed but at least one diagnostic test was prescribed to most patients. Colonoscopy and blood tests were the "first line" diagnostic tools. Macrogol was the most prescribed laxative, and prucalopride and pelvic floor rehabilitation represented a "second line" approach. Diagnostic tests and prescribed therapies increased by increasing CC severity.

Chronic constipation diagnosis and treatment evaluation: the "CHRO.CO.DI.T.E." study

BACKGROUND

According to Rome criteria, chronic constipation (CC) includes functional constipation (FC) and irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). Some patients do not meet these criteria (No Rome Constipation, NRC). The aim of the study was is to evaluate the various clinical presentation and management of FC, IBS-C and NRC in Italy.

METHODS

During a 2-month period, 52 Italian gastroenterologists recorded clinical data of FC, IBS-C and NRC patients, using Bristol scale, PAC-SYM and PAC-QoL questionnaires. In addition, gastroenterologists were also asked to record whether the patients were clinically assessed for CC for the first time or were in follow up. Diagnostic tests and prescribed therapies were also recorded.

RESULTS

Eight hundred seventy-eight consecutive CC patients (706 F) were enrolled (FC 62.5%, IBS-C 31.3%, NRC 6.2%). PAC-SYM and PAC-QoL scores were higher in IBS-C than in FC and NRC. 49.5% were at their first gastroenterological evaluation for CC. In 48.5% CC duration was longer than 10 years. A specialist consultation was requested in 31.6%, more frequently in IBS-C than in NRC. Digital rectal examination was performed in only 56.4%. Diagnostic tests were prescribed to 80.0%. Faecal calprotectin, thyroid tests, celiac serology, breath tests were more frequently suggested in IBS-C and anorectal manometry in FC. More than 90% had at least one treatment suggested on chronic constipation, most frequently dietary changes, macrogol and fibers. Antispasmodics and psychotherapy were more frequently prescribed in IBS-C, prucalopride and pelvic floor rehabilitation in FC.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBS-C reported more severe symptoms and worse quality of life than FC and NRC. Digital rectal examination was often not performed but at least one diagnostic test was prescribed to most patients. Colonoscopy and blood tests were the "first line" diagnostic tools. Macrogol was the most prescribed laxative, and prucalopride and pelvic floor rehabilitation represented a "second line" approach. Diagnostic tests and prescribed therapies increased by increasing CC severity.