Dyspepsia management in the millennium: the death of test and treat?

Evidence-based approach to dyspepsia: from Helicobacter pylori to functional disease

Patients with dyspepsia may present with associated complaints of abdominal pain, bloating, fullness, acid reflux, and epigastric tenderness on examination. The evaluation of patients with dyspepsia includes taking a comprehensive history and performing a physical examination. Although taking a patient history has its limitations in making an accurate diagnosis, it is useful in guiding the selection of subsequent diagnostic tests. Differential diagnoses of dyspepsia are best addressed using an anatomical approach. Patients with chronic dyspepsia lasting > 1 month should be evaluated for the presence of alarm features. Alarm features mandate an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy examination, as these may be suggestive of a malignancy. In patients without alarm features, a Helicobacter pylori test-and-treat strategy is cost-effective if the prevalence of H. pylori infection is high. Tests for H. pylori infection can be divided into non-invasive and minimally invasive tests. Many different antibiotic combination therapies (eg, triple therapy, quadruple therapy, levofloxacin-based therapy, sequential therapy, concomitant therapy, and probiotics with eradication therapy) are now available for the eradication of H. pylori infection. In patients who are symptomatic without an organic pathology, functional dyspepsia and other causes of abdominal pain need to be considered. Functional dyspepsia is best managed using a multifaceted approach by establishing a good physician-patient relationship, dietary and lifestyle interventions, medical therapy, psychotherapy, and the use of psychotropic medications. This review rationalizes the current-day recommendations for the evaluation and management of patients with dyspepsia in a clinical setting.

Prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection among new outpatients with dyspepsia in Kuwait

Background

Testing and treatment for Helicobacter pylori has become widely accepted as the approach of choice for patients with chronic dyspepsia but no alarming features. We evaluated H. pylori status among outpatients with uninvestigated dyspepsia in Kuwait.

Methods

A prospectively collected database for 1035 patients who had undergone ¹³C-urea breath tests (UBT) for various indications was reviewed for the period from October 2007 to July 2009. The status of H. pylori in dyspeptic patients was determined by UBT.

Results

Among the 362 patients who had undergone UBT for uninvestigated dyspepsia, 49.7% were positive for H. pylori (95% CI = 44%-55%) and the percentage increased with age (35.8% at 20-29 years, 95% CI = 25.4% - 47.2%; 59.3% at 30-39 years, 95% CI = 48.5% - 69.5%) (P = 0.013). The prevalence of H. pylori was 42.6% among Kuwaitis (95% CI = 35%-50%) and 57.6% (95% CI = 49.8%-65%) among expatriates (p = 0.004). The prevalence among males was 51.3%, while in females it was 48.6%.

Conclusions

Almost half of the patients with dyspeptic symptoms in Kuwait were positive for H. pylori, though the prevalence varied with age and was higher among expatriates. The American Gastroenterology Association guidelines recommending testing and treatment for H. pylori for patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia should be endorsed in Kuwait.

Economic evaluation of empirical antisecretory therapy versus Helicobacter pylori test for management of dyspepsia: a randomized trial in primary care

OBJECTIVES

An economic evaluation was performed of empirical antisecretory therapy versus test for Helicobacter pylori in the management of dyspepsia patients presenting in primary care.

METHODS

A randomized trial in 106 general practices in the County of Funen, Denmark, was designed to include prospective collection of clinical outcome measures and resource utilization data. Dyspepsia patients (n = 722) presenting in general practice with more than 2 weeks of epigastric pain or discomfort were managed according to one of three initial management strategies: (i) empirical antisecretory therapy, (ii) testing for Helicobacter pylori, or (iii) empirical antisecretory therapy, followed by Helicobacter pylori testing if symptoms improved. Cost-effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the strategies were determined.

RESULTS

The mean proportion of days without dyspeptic symptoms during the 1-year follow-up was 0.59 in the group treated with empirical antisecretory therapy, 0.57 in the H. pylori test-and-eradicate group, and 0.53 in the combination group. After 1 year, 23 percent, 26 percent, and 22 percent, respectively, were symptom-free. Applying the proportion of days without dyspeptic symptoms, the cost-effectiveness for empirical treatment, H. pylori test and the combination were 12,131 Danish kroner (DKK), 9,576 DKK, and 7,301 DKK, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness going from the combination strategy to empirical antisecretory treatment or H. pylori test alone was 54,783 DKK and 39,700 DKK per additional proportion of days without dyspeptic symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Empirical antisecretory therapy confers a small insignificant benefit but costs more than strategies based on test for H. pylori and is probably not a cost-effective strategy for the management of dyspepsia in primary care.

Guidelines for the management of dyspepsia

Dyspepsia is a chronic or recurrent pain or discomfort centered in the upper abdomen; patients with predominant or frequent (more than once a week) heartburn or acid regurgitation, should be considered to have gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) until proven otherwise. Dyspeptic patients over 55 yr of age, or those with alarm features should undergo prompt esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). In all other patients, there are two approximately equivalent options: (i) test and treat for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) using a validated noninvasive test and a trial of acid suppression if eradication is successful but symptoms do not resolve or (ii) an empiric trial of acid suppression with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) for 4-8 wk. The test-and-treat option is preferable in populations with a moderate to high prevalence of H. pylori infection (> or =10%); empirical PPI is an initial option in low prevalence situations. If initial acid suppression fails after 2-4 wk, it is reasonable to consider changing drug class or dosing. If the patient fails to respond or relapses rapidly on stopping antisecretory therapy, then the test-and-treat strategy is best applied before consideration of referral for EGD. Prokinetics are not currently recommended as first-line therapy for uninvestigated dyspepsia. EGD is not mandatory in those who remain symptomatic as the yield is low; the decision to endoscope or not must be based on clinical judgement. In patients who do respond to initial therapy, stop treatment after 4-8 wk; if symptoms recur, another course of the same treatment is justified. The management of functional dyspepsia is challenging when initial antisecretory therapy and H. pylori eradication fails. There are very limited data to support the use of low-dose tricyclic antidepressants or psychological treatments in functional dyspepsia.

Cost-effectiveness of a 'score and scope' strategy for the management of dyspepsia

OBJECTIVE

It is important to identify the best initial work-up in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia because of its epidemiological and economical relevance. The objective of the study was to assess systematically the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of invasive and non-invasive strategies for the management of dyspepsia.

METHODS

A decision analysis was performed to compare prompt endoscopy, score and scope, test and scope, test and treat, and empirical antisecretory treatment. Published and local data on the prevalence of different diagnoses, rates of Helicobacter pylori infection, accuracy values of diagnostic tests, and effectiveness of drug treatments were used. The perspective of analysis was that of the public healthcare payer, and only direct costs were included, with a one-year post-therapy time horizon. The main outcome measure was cost per asymptomatic patient, valued in 2003 Euros.

RESULTS

Endoscopy was found to be the most effective strategy for the management of dyspepsia (38.4% asymptomatic patients), followed by test and scope (35.5%), test and treat (35.3%), score and scope (34.7%), and empirical treatment (28.5%). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios showed that score and scope was the most cost-effective alternative (483.17 Euros per asymptomatic patient), followed by prompt endoscopy (1396.85 Euros). Sensitivity analyses showed variations when varying the values of prevalence of duodenal ulcer, and the values of healing of functional dyspepsia with antisecretory and eradication drugs. There were no changes when varying the prevalence of H. pylori in dyspepsia.

CONCLUSIONS

We would recommend stratifying patients by a score system, referring first to endoscopy those patients at higher risk of organic dyspepsia.

Dyspepsia management in primary care: a management trial

The aim was to evaluate the outcomes associated with four initial management strategies in new patients presenting to primary care physicians with dyspepsia. Patients with new symptoms (no alarm features) were randomised to empirical therapy (n = 11), Helicobacter pylori (HP) serology (n = 8), HP breath testing (n = 11) or oesophagogastroduodenoscopy (n = 13). Dyspepsia and health-related quality of life were assessed using standardised questionnaires at entry, 6 and 24 weeks post-trial enrollment. Outcomes were assessed by structured telephone interview every 6 weeks. In the initial HP testing arms, 21% were positive; 27% in the oesophagogastroduodenoscopy arm had inflammatory changes without ulcers at baseline. The majority (67%) received over the counter medication after initial management. Symptom-free status was similarly common in all groups (p = 0.49); only 20% pursued further evaluation. Total billed charges were higher in the oesophagogastroduodenoscopy group (US 2077 dollars) vs. empirical therapy (US 512 dollars), despite excluding the charge for initial oesophagogastroduodenoscopy, but overall, no effects on total medical charges were detected (p = 0.10). Regardless of initial management, most patients remained symptomatic, yet did not return for health care visits or undergo endoscopies. The cost of upfront endoscopy may not be the best choice for patients presenting with new dyspepsia.

Long-term follow-up of empirical treatment or prompt endoscopy for patients with persistent dyspeptic symptoms?

BACKGROUND

There are concerns about the safety and possible high costs of ongoing proton pump inhibitor therapy of empirical management strategies for patients with persistent dyspeptic symptoms.

AIM

To compare the long-term results of two treatment strategies: empirical treatment followed by the Helicobacter pylori test and treat strategy (treat and test group) and prompt upper gastrointestinal endoscopy followed by directed medical treatment (endoscopy group).

METHODS

In this study we describe the long-term follow-up data from a previously published randomized clinical trial. At least 6 years after randomization all participating general practitioners and patients were asked to give information about medication use, diagnostic testing, symptoms and quality of life by questionnaire.

RESULTS

Information about a total of 77 out of the 80 patients initially included (96%) was retrieved. Overall, 16 patients from the treat and test group (41%) underwent 18 diagnostic investigations. The 34 patients (100%) from the endoscopy group underwent 38 investigations (P < 0.01). The number of patients of the treat and test group and endoscopy group using acid inhibition therapy was 15 (38%) and 19 (56%), respectively (P = 0.14). There were also no differences in symptom prevalence and quality of life between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Treat and test management for patients with dyspeptic symptoms is safe and does not lead to additional diagnostic testing or use of medication when compared to prompt endoscopy.

What the physician needs to know for correct management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and dyspepsia

Upper gastrointestinal symptoms are highly prevalent; usually those consulting have multiple symptoms, confounding management. Here, common clinically relevant management issues are considered based on the best available evidence. Regardless of the presenting symptoms, determine if there are any alarm features; these have a low positive predictive value for malignancy but all patients with them should be referred for prompt upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Ask about medications; of most importance are the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), both non-selective and COX-2 selective. Try to ascertain if the symptom pattern suggests gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or not. Dominant heartburn, however, may be of limited value; if the background prevalence of GERD is 25% and the patient complains of dominant heartburn, then the likelihood that such a patient has GERD as identified by 24-h oesophageal pH testing is only just over 50%. If reflux disease is strongly suspected and there are no alarm features, give an empirical trial of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). Symptoms cannot separate adequately functional from organic dyspepsia. Endoscopy in dyspepsia with no alarm features is more costly than an empirical management approach. H. pylori testing and treatment remains in most settings the preferable initial choice for managing dyspepsia without obvious GERD. However, a PPI trial may offer a similar outcome and may be preferable in low H. pylori prevalence areas; head-to-head management trials in primary care are lacking.

Trends in peptic ulcer pharmacotherapy

Considering the diseases of the stomach and duodenum, peptic ulcer has been the one with a significant clinical impact. The pathophysiology of peptic ulcer has centred on an imbalance between aggressive and protective factors. The discovery of Helicobacter pylori as a cause of peptic ulcer has changed our approach greatly towards this disease. Despite the decreasing frequency of H. pylori-induced peptic ulcers, peptic ulcer remains a major clinical problem partly because nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related ulcers and hospital admissions for ulcer complications associated with NSAIDs have increased in frequency. The interaction between H. pylori and NSAIDs is one of the most controversial issues in peptic ulcer. In this article, current concepts of peptic ulcer etiopathogenesis and the management of peptic ulcer according to the etiology were reviewed.

Triptans and gastric accommodation: pharmacological and therapeutic aspects

In the past decade, several studies have reported a significant delay of gastric emptying induced by the anti-migraine agent sumatriptan (a 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)1B/D receptor agonist) in healthy human beings. In patients with functional dyspepsia, sumatriptan improves gastric accommodation after food consumption and reduce perception of gastric distension, hence relieving epigastric symptoms. Recent studies have established that impaired accommodation after food consumption is a major patho-physiological mechanism in functional dyspepsia and restoration of accommodation is considered to be a potential therapeutic target. The precise site of action of sumatriptan in humans is at present unknown, although recent studies carried out using a canine model indicate that sumatriptan exerts its action on gastric accommodation through 5-HT1B receptors, since both GR127935 and SB216641 (respectively, non selective 5-HT1B/D and selective 5-HT1B receptor antagonists) fully antagonised the effects of sumatriptan. Gastric relaxation and enhanced accommodation to a distending stimulus seem to be a class effect of triptans, since it occurs not only with sumatriptan, but also with second-generation triptans (rizatriptan and naratriptan), at least in a canine model. In dyspeptic patients, administration of triptans would be able to restore gastric accommodation after a meal and to improve symptoms of early satiety, confirming the therapeutic potential of 5-HT1B/D receptor agonists in functional dyspepsia.

The management of peptic ulcer disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The period under review has seen little evolution in our understanding of the empiric management of dyspepsia. The role of Helicobacter pylori in this setting remains controversial, and a policy of risk stratification with the prudent use of test and treat and symptomatic therapy, with endoscopy for nonresponsive cases, seems to have some support from the literature in this period.

RECENT FINDINGS

The management of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug-associated and aspirin-associated complications has received a lot of attention in the period under review. The COX-2 selective agents have maintained their reputation as safer (but not "safe") options, although some of the original work with one of these agents has been rigorously interrogated and found wanting. Studies in the review period have focused our attention on the less than satisfactory protection of proton pump inhibitor cotherapy, the site-specific nature of ulcer recurrences (which may have therapeutic implications), lower gastroenterology complications associated with NSAID use, and the beneficial effect of proton pump inhibitor cotherapy for patients receiving low-dose aspirin. One should also expect a lot more information in the future with regard to the use of the nitric oxide donating class of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and aspirin.

SUMMARY

Findings are presented that suggest that the H.pylori stool antigen test is not as reliable as the urea breath test, while the most promising "new therapy" for H. pylori is not new, but rather an amalgam of some older drugs combined in a new "quadruple" therapy strategy, which shows some promise.

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.

Helicobacter pylori and nonmalignant disease

Helicobacter pylori eradication has become the recognized standard and widely adopted therapy to cure peptic ulcer disease. Other H. pylori associated conditions with potential benefit from eradication therapy are still subject to clinical investigations. The current state of evidence for these indications is summarized in this article. For NSAID associated peptic ulcer disease the current evidence needs to be grouped in three subsets of clinical conditions: a) H. pylori eradication for prevention of ulcers before starting NSAIDs therapy is advisable; b) eradication during PPI treatment for NSAID associated active ulcer shows no advantage on healing; and c) eradication alone is not sufficient for secondary prevention of ulcer complications induced by NSAID, however it appears to protect from further episodes of aspirin induced bleeding. In nonulcer dyspepsia the latest Cochrane collaboration review supports a small benefit in favour of H. pylori eradication. New insight in the relationship of H. pylori with GERD is provided from clinical trials which show that H. pylori eradication does not influence the clinical course of patients with reflux esophagitis. Finally important new data are presented regarding the management of dyspepsia at the primary care level with the confirmation that the H. pylori 'test and treat' strategy in the appropriate setting is more cost-effective than endoscopy.