Management of dyspeptic patients in primary care. Value of the unaided clinical diagnosis and of dyspepsia subgrouping

Endoscopic Findings in Patients With Uninvestigated Dyspepsia: A Retrospective Study From Qatar

Background and objective Dyspepsia is a common complaint encountered in general clinical practice. The prevalence of clinically significant endoscopy findings in dyspeptic subjects of various age groups and ethnicities in Qatar is not well studied. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of endoscopic findings in previously uninvestigated patients with dyspepsia. Patients and methods We retrospectively studied subjects older than 18 years of age who underwent endoscopy for dyspeptic complaints from January 2011 to December 2017. Subjects who already had peptic ulcer disease (PUD), those who underwent endoscopy for reasons other than dyspepsia, and those with incomplete data were excluded. Results A total of 824 subjects were reviewed for eligibility and 733 were included for analysis. The mean ±SD age of the study subjects was 42.7 ±13.5 years, and 59.5% of the subjects were male. Epigastric pain was the predominant symptom (79.2%) followed by heartburn (26.1%). Abnormal endoscopic findings were noted in 91.8% of subjects. Gastritis (65.5%) and oesophagitis (33.1%) were the most common findings observed. The overall prevalence of gastric ulcers was 4.6%, and it was higher in subjects who were more than 60 years of age (14.1%, p=0.001). Gastric carcinoma was seen in only four (0.54%) subjects. Conclusion Gastritis was the most common endoscopic finding observed followed by oesophagitis. The most common presenting symptoms were epigastric pain and heartburn. The prevalence of gastric ulcers was significantly high in patients above 60 years of age, and the incidence of gastric carcinoma was low in the study population.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Functional Dyspepsia Overlap: Do Birds of a Feather Flock Together?

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and functional dyspepsia (FD) are 2 of the most prevalent upper gastrointestinal (GI) disorders in the Western world. Previous Rome definitions excluded patients with predominant heartburn from the definition of FD because they were considered to have GERD. However, more recent studies showed that heartburn and acid regurgitation are also common symptoms in patients with FD. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the prevalence of overlap between GERD and FD, the underlying pathophysiology and implications for treatment.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed using the PubMed database, and a meta-analysis with random effects model was completed.

RESULTS

This review showed considerable overlap between GERD and FD. A meta-analysis on the data included in this review showed 7.41% (confidence interval [CI]: 4.55%-11.84%) GERD/FD overlap in the general population, 41.15% (CI: 29.46%-53.93%) GERD with FD symptoms, and 31.32% (CI: 19.43%-46.29%) FD with GERD symptoms. Although numerous committees and consensus groups attempted to develop uniform definitions for the diagnosis of GERD and FD, various diagnostic criteria are used across studies and clinical trials (frequency, severity, and location of symptoms). Several studies showed that the overlap between GERD and FD can be explained by a shared pathophysiology, including delayed gastric emptying and disturbed gastric accommodation.

DISCUSSION

For diagnoses of GERD and FD, uniform definitions that are easy to implement in population studies, easy to interpret for physicians, and that need to be well explained to patients to avoid overestimation or underestimation of true prevalence are needed. Both GERD and FD coexist more frequently than expected, based on coincidence, suggesting a potential pathophysiological link. More research is needed to explore the common GERD/FD overlap population to identify the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, which may lead to a more effective therapeutic approach.

Self-rated health and functional capacity in individuals reporting overlapping symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease, functional dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome - a population based study

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), functional dyspepsia (FD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are common functional gastrointestinal conditions with a significant impact on daily life. The objectives were to analyse general self-rated health and self-reported functional capacity in adults meeting the criteria for GERD, FD and IBS, respectively, and in individuals who meet the criteria for more than one of the conditions.

METHODS

A nationwide study of 100,000 individuals aged 20 years and above, randomly selected in the general Danish population. A web-based questionnaire survey formed the basis of this study. Questions regarding FD and IBS were extracted from the ROME III adult questionnaire. Questions regarding GERD were developed based on the Montreal definition. Self-rated health and functional capacity was measured by single global questions.

RESULTS

Respondents meeting the criteria for either GERD, FD or IBS have significantly higher odds of reporting poor self-rated health and impaired functional capacity compared to individuals not experiencing these functional gastrointestinal conditions. Furthermore, respondents with overlapping gastrointestinal (GI) symptom complexes have significantly higher odds of reporting poor self-rated health and impaired functional capacity compared to respondents with symptoms compatible with only one of the symptom complexes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that individuals experiencing symptoms of GERD, FD or IBS report poor self-rated health as well as impaired functional capacity. The impact on self-rated health and functional capacity is highest among individuals experiencing overlapping symptoms of GERD, FD and IBS.

Self-rated health and functional capacity in individuals reporting overlapping symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease, functional dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome - a population based study

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), functional dyspepsia (FD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are common functional gastrointestinal conditions with a significant impact on daily life. The objectives were to analyse general self-rated health and self-reported functional capacity in adults meeting the criteria for GERD, FD and IBS, respectively, and in individuals who meet the criteria for more than one of the conditions.

METHODS

A nationwide study of 100,000 individuals aged 20 years and above, randomly selected in the general Danish population. A web-based questionnaire survey formed the basis of this study. Questions regarding FD and IBS were extracted from the ROME III adult questionnaire. Questions regarding GERD were developed based on the Montreal definition. Self-rated health and functional capacity was measured by single global questions.

RESULTS

Respondents meeting the criteria for either GERD, FD or IBS have significantly higher odds of reporting poor self-rated health and impaired functional capacity compared to individuals not experiencing these functional gastrointestinal conditions. Furthermore, respondents with overlapping gastrointestinal (GI) symptom complexes have significantly higher odds of reporting poor self-rated health and impaired functional capacity compared to respondents with symptoms compatible with only one of the symptom complexes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that individuals experiencing symptoms of GERD, FD or IBS report poor self-rated health as well as impaired functional capacity. The impact on self-rated health and functional capacity is highest among individuals experiencing overlapping symptoms of GERD, FD and IBS.

Minimal differences in prevalence and spectrum of organic disease at upper gastrointestinal endoscopy between selected secondary care patients with symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux or dyspepsia

OBJECTIVES

Gastro-oesophageal reflux and dyspepsia are felt to be separate upper gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. We aimed to measure the degree of overlap between them, and assess whether endoscopic findings differed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Demographic, symptom, upper GI endoscopy and histology data were collected from consecutive adults in secondary care. Patients were categorised according to whether they reported gastro-oesophageal reflux alone, dyspepsia alone or both, and patient demographics and endoscopic findings were compared.

RESULTS

Of 1167 patients, 97 (8.3%) had gastro-oesophageal reflux alone, 571 (48.9%) dyspepsia alone, and 499 (42.8%) overlap. Patients with overlap symptoms were more likely to smoke, compared with those with gastro-oesophageal reflux alone, or dyspepsia alone (p = .009), but there were no other differences. Patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux alone or overlap had a higher prevalence of erosive oesophagitis (18.6% and 15.4% respectively, p < .001), but this was still the commonest diagnosis among those with dyspepsia alone (7.2%). No significant differences were seen in prevalence of other endoscopic findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastro-oesophageal reflux and dyspepsia symptoms commonly overlap. There were minimal differences in demographics or spectrum of underlying organic disease between various symptom groups, suggesting that restrictive classifications according to predominant symptom may not be clinically useful.

Diagnostic value of symptoms of oesophagogastric cancers in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Selection of primary care patients for investigation of potential oesophagogastric cancer is difficult, as the symptoms may represent benign conditions, which are also more common.

AIM

To review systematically the presenting features of oesophagogastric cancers in primary care, including open-access endoscopy clinics.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHOD

MEDLINE®, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were searched for studies of adults who were symptomatic and presented in primary care or open-access endoscopy clinics. Exclusions were being asymptomatic, screening, or recurrent cancers. Data were extracted to estimate the diagnostic performance of features of oesophagogastric cancers and summarised in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were identified. The strongest summary sensitivity and specificity estimates were for: dyspepsia 0.42 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29 to 0.56) and 0.48 (95% CI = 0.31 to 0.65); pain 0.41 (95% CI = 0.24 to 0.62) and 0.75 (95% CI = 0.51 to 0.89); and dysphagia 0.32 (95% CI = 0.17 to 0.52) and 0.92 (95% CI = 0.81 to 0.97). Summary positive likelihood ratios (LR+) and diagnostic odds ratios were: dyspepsia 0.79 (95% CI = 0.55 to 1.15) and 0.65 (95% CI = 0.32 to 1.33); pain 1.64 (95% CI = 1.20 to 2.24) and 2.09 (95% CI = 1.57 to 2.77); and dysphagia 4.32 (95% CI = 2.46 to 7.58) and 5.91 (95% CI = 3.56 to 9.82). Sensitivity was lower for: anaemia 0.12 [95% Cl = 0.08 to 0.19] with specificity 0.97 [95% Cl = 0.94 to 0.99]; nausea/vomiting/bloating 0.17 [95% Cl = 0.05 to 0.46] and 0.84 [95% Cl = 0.60 to 0.94] respectively; reflux 0.23 [95% Cl = 0.10 to 0.46] and 0.70 [95% Cl = 0.59 to 0.80]; weight loss 0.25 [95% Cl = 0.12 to 0.43] and 0.96 [95% Cl = 0.88 to 0.98]. [corrected]. Corresponding LR+ were: anaemia 4.32 (95% CI = 2.64 to 7.08); nausea/vomiting/bloating 1.07 (95% CI = 0.52 to 2.19); reflux 0.78 (95% CI = 0.47 to 1.78) and; weight loss 5.46 (95% CI = 3.47 to 8.60).

CONCLUSION

Dysphagia, weight loss, and anaemia show the strongest association but with relatively low sensitivity and high specificity. The findings support the value of investigation of these symptoms, but also suggest that, in a population of patients who are low risk but not no-risk, investigation is not currently recommended.

Overlap of symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease, dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome in the general population

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), functional dyspepsia (FD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are common functional gastrointestinal conditions with significant impact on the daily lives of individuals. The objective was to investigate the prevalence and overlap of the three conditions in a Western general population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A nationwide study of 100,000 individuals 20 years and above, randomly selected in the general population. A web-based questionnaire survey formed the basis of this study. Questions regarding FD and IBS were extracted from the ROME III adult questionnaire. Questions regarding GERD were developed based on the Montreal definition. Prevalence estimates for GERD, FD IBS were calculated in total and for each sex separately and for four age groups. A Venn diagram was constructed, illustrating the overlap between the three conditions.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 52.2%. The prevalence of GERD, FD and IBS was 11.2%, 7.7% and 10.5%, respectively, and overlap between two or three of these conditions was seen among 6.5% of the respondents. Among individuals meeting the criteria of one or more of the conditions GERD, FD and IBS, 30.7% had overlap between two or all three conditions.

CONCLUSION

GERD, FD and IBS are common conditions in the general population and the overlap between these conditions is also quite common. When diagnosing patients with GERD, FD and IBS, physicians should keep in mind that these patients could be suffering from more than one of these conditions.

[Clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with dyspepsia. Update 2012]

The aim of the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on the Management of Patients with Dyspepsia is to generate recommendations on the optimal approach to dyspepsia in the primary care and specialized outpatient setting. The main objective of this CPG is to help to optimize the diagnostic process, identifying patients with a low risk of a serious organic disease (mainly tumoral), who could be safely managed without the need for invasive diagnostic tests and/or referral to a specialist. The importance of this aim lies in the need to accurately diagnose patients with esophagogastric cancer and correctly treat peptic ulcer while, at the same time, reduce negative endoscopies in order to appropriately use the available healthcare resources. This CPG reviews the initial strategies that can be used in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia and evaluates the possible decision to begin empirical therapy or to investigate the existence of a lesion that could explain the symptoms. This CPG also discusses functional dyspepsia, which encompasses all patients with dyspepsia with no demonstrable cause on endoscopy. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection are also made. To classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) system has been used (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

[Clinical practice guideline on the management of patients with dyspepsia. Update 2012]

The aim of the Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) on the Management of Patients with Dyspepsia is to generate recommendations on the optimal approach to dyspepsia in the primary care and specialized outpatient setting. The main objective of this CPG is to help to optimize the diagnostic process, identifying patients with a low risk of a serious organic disease (mainly tumoral), who could be safely managed without the need for invasive diagnostic tests and/or referral to a specialist. The importance of this aim lies in the need to accurately diagnose patients with esophagogastric cancer and correctly treat peptic ulcer while, at the same time, reduce negative endoscopies in order to appropriately use the available healthcare resources.This CPG reviews the initial strategies that can be used in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia and evaluates the possible decision to begin empirical therapy or to investigate the existence of a lesion that could explain the symptoms. This CPG also discusses functional dyspepsia, which encompasses all patients with dyspepsia with no demonstrable cause on endoscopy. Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer and Helicobacter pylori infection are also made. To classify the scientific evidence and strengthen the recommendations, the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) system has been used (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

The management of patients with new onset of upper gastro-intestinal symptoms in primary care

BACKGROUND

Data dealing with dyspepsia management in general practice are lacking, and most of the studies investigated a subset of patients with suspected peptic ulcer disease either with or without previous complaints.

AIMS

To evaluate the one-year management of patients presenting new onset upper abdominal symptoms without alarming features.

METHODS

275 patients were enrolled by 63 Italian general practitioners.

RESULTS

Referral to upper gastro-intestinal tract endoscopy resulted significantly higher in patients with predominant epigastric pain compared to subjects with non-painful symptoms or non-dominant symptoms. Amongst drug therapies, only prokinetics and antacids and anti-secretory therapies were prescribed differently amongst clinical subgroups. The rate and type of management and referrals resulted were not influenced by the age of patients or the use of anti-inflammatory drugs. The most frequent diagnosis at one-year follow-up was reflux oesophagitis. The absence of organic disease was less frequent in patients with dominant epigastric pain than non-painful or non-dominant symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The management of these patients in primary care in Italy is mainly determined by clinical presentation, independent of age. Any judgement about appropriateness of the treatment should consider not only conventional features such as age, but the more complex individual frameworks as well.

The modern investigation and management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD)

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease results from impaired function of the LOS and acid clearance of the distal oesophagus. Most patients do not require investigation and respond either to lifestyle changes, antacid/alginates, H2A, PPI or a combination of these treatments. Surgery is only rarely indicated.

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.

Sensitivity of ultrasonography for gastric cancer diagnosis in symptomatic patients

Endoscopy with biopsy sampling is the gold standard used in gastric cancer diagnosis. However, the positive predictive value of signs and symptoms for the diagnosis of carcinomas is quite limited, and, therefore, many patients are subjected to non-diagnostic endoscopies, especially when symptoms are not so specific. This study shows that ultrasonography is sensitive enough for the diagnosis of gastric cancer, and, therefore, use of this technique would further ensure a better selection of patients for endoscopy. The study included 143 patients (86 men and 57 women, with an average age of 68.6 years) who were suspected of having gastric cancer. The diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography was evaluated in a blind study. The conventional technique was used in all cases. Demographic parameters and a series of other clinical-analytical variables were studied to look for possible gastric cancer predictive factors, which when present would make ultrasonographic results irrelevant. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS 12.0, wherein a value of P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Of the 143 patients studied, 40 were diagnosed to have gastric cancer. Sonography was able to diagnose 37 cases correctly, while there were three false negative findings and eight false positive findings. This results in 92.5% sensitivity, 92.2% specificity, 82.2% positive predictive value, 96.9% negative predictive value, and a global accuracy of 92.3%. Univariate analysis showed that persistent vomiting (P = 0.021), hemoglobin level of less than 8 g/dl (P = 0.045) and a positive ultrasonography result (P < 0.0001) were associated with a higher frequency of gastric cancer. Multivariate analysis showed that persistent vomiting, with an odds ratio for gastric cancer of 3.68 (95% confidence interval 1.15-11.79; P = 0.039), and a positive ultrasonography result, with an odds ratio for gastric cancer of 117.78 (95% confidence interval 32.45-427.49; P < 0.0001), could be considered as independent predictive factors for gastric cancer. It was concluded that ultrasonography is a very sensitive and specific technique for diagnosing gastric cancer. Gastric cancer was found to be present in just 28% of the patients studied, and their condition was suspect because of the clinical manifestations. Only vomiting and a positive ultrasonography result can be considered as independent predictive factors of gastric cancer.

Endoscopic reflux esophagitis in patients with upper abdominal pain-predominant dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Reflux symptom assessment had reliable accuracy in the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, patients may recognize heartburn or regurgitation as dyspepsia because of inaccurate understanding or atypical presentation. The aim of the present study was to estimate endoscopic reflux esophagitis in patients with upper abdominal pain as a predominant symptom in the absence of heartburn or regurgitation.

METHODS

Two hundred and sixty-three consecutive patients presenting dyspepsia without heartburn or regurgitation were enrolled. Patients with heartburn or regurgitation were excluded using the symptom interviewer method. Dyspepsia was categorized into pain-predominant or dysmotility-predominant groups according to the Rome II proposal. Endoscopic reflux esophagitis was graded using the Los Angeles classification.

RESULTS

One hundred and five patients were included in the pain-predominant group and 119 in the dysmotility-predominant group. Reflux esophagitis was found in 18.8% (42/224) of all dyspeptic patients. Grade A esophagitis was noted in 27.6% (29/105) of the pain-predominant group and in 7.6% (9/119) of the dysmotility-predominant group. Grade B was noted in two patients in each group. A total of 29.5% (31/105) and 9.3% (11/119) had reflux esophagitis, respectively (P < 0.001). Comparing patients with or without reflux esophagitis, there was no difference in body mass index, smoking habit, alcohol consumption, or Helicobacter pylori infection status.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of patients presenting dyspepsia, especially pain-predominant dyspepsia, have endoscopic reflux esophagitis. In view of GERD, pain-predominant dyspepsia should be investigated and managed differently from dysmotility-predominant dyspepsia.

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.

Three centuries of stomach symptoms in Scotland

BACKGROUND

Stomach pain and discomfort have been reported since antiquity.

AIM

To follow the time trends since the 18th century of dyspepsia, gastric ulcer, duodenal ulcer, and benign oesophageal disease to test when dyspepsia started to become a major clinical problem.

METHODS

The annual in- and out-patient records of the last three centuries from the Scottish Royal Infirmaries of Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Glasgow and Dundee were analysed. In addition, dispensary attendances, clinicians' casebooks, students' notebooks and medical texts have been scrutinized for historic statistics of upper gastrointestinal disease.

RESULTS

Dyspepsia was first recorded in the 1750s and increased markedly subsequently. Such dyspepsia persisted after gastric and duodenal ulcers appeared in the late 19th century and then declined again in the late 20th century. Non-ulcer dyspepsia has remained the commonest diagnosis made after endoscopy for stomach pain in the beginning of the 21st century.

CONCLUSION

The current commonest diagnosis of stomach pain, dyspepsia dates from the mid-18th century. Any explanations of its causation need to consider this timing.

Limited value of alarm features in the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal malignancy: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Alarm features such as dysphagia, weight loss, or anemia raise concern of an upper gastrointestinal malignancy in patients with dyspepsia. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of alarm features in predicting malignancy by performing a metaanalysis based on the published literature.

METHODS

English-language studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and CINAHL. Cohort studies that measured alarm features and compared them with the endoscopic findings were included. Studies were screened for inclusion by 2 authors who independently extracted the data. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were calculated by comparing the alarm feature with the endoscopic diagnosis. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve method was used to summarize test characteristics across studies. Individual alarm features were also assessed when the study report permitted.

RESULTS

Eighty-three of 2600 studies met the initial screening criteria; 15 met inclusion criteria after detailed review. These 15 studies evaluated a total of 57,363 patients, of whom 458 (.8%) had cancer. The sensitivity of alarm symptoms varied from 0% to 83% with considerable heterogeneity between studies. The specificity also varied significantly from 40% to 98%. A clinical diagnosis made by a physician was very specific (range, 97%-98%) but not very sensitive (range, 11%-53%).

CONCLUSIONS

Alarm features have limited predictive value for an underlying malignancy. Their use in dyspepsia management strategies needs further refinement and study.

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease refers to reflux of gastric contents into the oesophagus leading to oesophagitis, reflux symptoms sufficient to impair quality of life, or long-term complications. Transient relaxation of the lower oesophageal sphincter is believed to be the primary mechanism of the disease although the underlying cause remains uncertain. Obesity and smoking are weakly associated with the disease and genetic factors might be important. A negative association with Helicobacter pylori exists, but eradication of H pylori does not seem to cause reflux disease. Diagnosis is imprecise as there is no gold standard. Reflux symptoms are helpful in diagnosis but they lack sensitivity. Ambulatory oesophageal pH monitoring also seems to be insensitive despite high specificity. Empirical acid suppression with a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) has reasonable sensitivity but poor specificity. Some evidence suggests that once patients develop the disease, severity is determined early and patients seem to continue with that phenotype long term. Unfortunately, most patients do not respond to life-style advice and require further therapy. H2 receptor antagonists and PPIs are better than placebo in oesophagitis, with a number needed to treat of five and two, respectively. In non-erosive reflux disease, acid suppression is better than placebo but the response rate is lower. Most patients need long-term treatment because the disease usually relapses. The role of endoscopic therapy is uncertain. Anti-reflux surgery is probably as effective as PPI therapy although there is a low operative mortality and morbidity.

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.

Clinical usefulness of serum pepsinogens I and II, gastrin-17 and anti-Helicobacterpylori antibodies in the management of dyspeptic patients in primary care

BACKGROUND

Several tests have been proposed for evaluating dyspeptic symptoms and their relationship to the underlying gastric disease. Serum pepsinogens and gastrin-17 are known to be useful biomarkers for the detection of gastric pathologies.

AIM

To evaluate the capability of screening dyspeptic patients in the primary care by analyses of serum pepsinogens I (sPGI) and II (sPGII), gastrin-17 (sG-17) and the IgG anti-Helicobacter pylori antibodies (IgG-Hp).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Three hundred and sixty-two consecutive patients with dyspeptic symptoms (208 females, mean age 50.6 +/- 16 years, range 18-88 years) referred by general practitioners for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were enrolled. A blood sample was taken from each subject for IgG-Hp, sPGI, sPGII and sG-17 analyses.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighty-seven patients had a complete screening; of these, 132 resulted positive for Hp infection. Patients with atrophic chronic gastritis showed significantly lower serum pepsinogen I levels and sPGI/sPGII ratio than patients with non-atrophic chronic gastritis. Moreover, by calculating the values of sPGI by sG-17 and sG-17 by sPGII/sPGI, subjects with atrophic chronic gastritis could be distinguished from those with non-atrophic chronic gastritis and from those with normal mucosa, respectively. sG-17 levels were found to be a useful biomarker for the detection of antral atrophic gastritis, while the combination of sPGI, the sPGI/sPGII ratio and sG-17 was found effective in identifying corpus atrophy.

CONCLUSION

A panel composed of PGI, PGII, G-17 and IgG-Hp could be used as a first approach in the 'test and scope' and/or 'test and treat' strategy in the primary care management of dyspeptic patients.

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.

Classification of dyspepsia and response to treatment with proton-pump inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Lacking an objective 'gold standard' for diagnosing dyspepsia, several symptom-based classifications have been suggested.

AIM

To assess if response to proton-pump inhibitor treatment could provide useful information for current or future dyspepsia classification.

METHODS

Post hoc analyses of 829 patients treated with omeprazole or placebo in a randomized-controlled trial. The 'true' response to omeprazole (trial response minus placebo response) was assessed according to different classifications of dyspepsia and different symptoms.

RESULTS

Symptoms described with the words 'burning' or 'sour' and patients with reflux-like dyspepsia demonstrated high response to omeprazole treatment, whereas patients with abdominal pain or ulcer-like dyspepsia responded unpredictably to omeprazole. The response to omeprazole in patients with epigastic pain was related to the pattern of other dyspeptic symptoms. Patients with heartburn or regurgitation overlapped extensively with patients with epigastric pain.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated significant problems in the current classification of dyspepsia: 'the most bothersome symptom' was not independently related to the omeprazole effect and, in patients with abdominal pain, the response to omeprazole was dependent on the presence or absence of other dyspeptic symptoms. The overlap of symptoms indicates that heartburn and regurgitation should be recognized as symptoms of dyspepsia in primary care.

Diagnostic approach to dyspepsia

The optimal diagnostic approach to the dyspeptic patient in primary care is still debated. Early endoscopy continues to be the diagnostic gold standard but competing non-invasive strategies challenge this. The most important approaches are empiric antisecretory treatment reserving endoscopy for unresponsive patients and patients with an early symptomatic relapse and helicobacter-based strategies reserving endoscopy for infected patients (test-and-scope) or for failures after eradication therapy (test-and-treat). Early endoscopy is recommended in patients with alarm features and should be considered in patients with new onset dyspepsia after age 50. In the remaining patients, early investigation can only be recommended in areas providing endoscopy at a low cost and with a short waiting list. The test-and-scope strategy may lead to a rise in the referral rates for endoscopy and cannot be recommended. The test-and-treat strategy is well documented in clinical trials as a safe and cost-effective approach. Helicobacter-based strategies are challenged by a decreasing prevalence of peptic ulcer disease and of the infection. In the near future, the empirical acid inhibition strategy will probably be cost-effective as gastro-oesophageal reflux becomes the predominant disorder in dyspeptic patients.

Empirical use of antisecretory drug therapy delays diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma but does not effect outcome

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal cancer carries a poor prognosis. Although the incidence of gastric adenocarcinoma is falling, oesophageal adenocarcinoma is increasing. This has been attributed to an increasing prevalence of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, commonly treated empirically in primary care with antisecretory drugs. Treatment has been associated with delayed diagnosis but it is unclear if this influences prognosis.

AIMS

To ascertain the effect of antisecretory drugs on time to diagnosis, symptoms, tumour stage and outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of primary care records for 747 patients diagnosed with upper gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma at South Tees NHS Trust between 1991 and 2001.

RESULTS

Mean time from the onset of symptoms to diagnosis was 30 weeks. Mean and median times at the primary care stage were longer than at the hospital stage for both oesophageal and gastric cancer (P < 0.0001). Patients with benign symptoms prescribed antisecretory drugs were referred later than those not on antisecretory drugs (P < 0.0001), as were patients with alarm symptoms (P = 0.0008). Prior use of antisecretory drugs delayed diagnosis by 17.6 weeks (mean) but had no effect on tumour stage at diagnosis or survival.

CONCLUSION

Prior antisecretory drug therapy was associated with delayed diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma irrespective of presenting symptoms. Concerns that delays might adversely affect tumour stage or long-term survival were not substantiated.

Can symptoms predict endoscopic findings in GERD?

BACKGROUND

It is difficult to decide which patients with reflux symptoms require endoscopy. The aim of this study was to develop a scoring system to predict esophageal findings at endoscopy.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of 1011 adult patients scheduled for upper endoscopy were asked to complete a validated symptom questionnaire. The endoscopy reports were abstracted. Individual logistic regression models were developed to predict esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus (long and short segment) and esophageal stricture, including Schatzki's ring.

RESULTS

Reflux esophagitis was independently associated with heartburn frequency (p<0.0001) but not severity or duration (p>0.05). Barrett's esophagus was associated with the duration of acid regurgitation (p<0.005) but not with frequency or severity (p>0.05). Strictures were associated with dysphagia severity (p<0.0001) and duration (p<0.0001) but not frequency (p>0.05). At a sensitivity of 80%, the models had a specificity of 49% for esophagitis, 57% for Barrett's esophagus, and 68% for strictures. At a specificity of 80%, the sensitivities were 51% for esophagitis, 62% for Barrett's esophagus and 71% for strictures.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic findings were associated with distinct attributes of reflux symptoms. Symptoms are only modestly predictive of findings at endoscopy.

The prevalence of clinically significant endoscopic findings in primary care patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia: the Canadian Adult Dyspepsia Empiric Treatment - Prompt Endoscopy (CADET-PE) study

BACKGROUND

Uninvestigated dyspepsia is common in family practice. The prevalence of clinically significant upper gastrointestinal findings (CSFs) in adult uninvestigated dyspepsia patients, and their predictability based on history, is unknown.

METHODS

Prompt endoscopy was performed within 10 days of referral, in 1040 adult patients presenting with uninvestigated dyspepsia at 49 Canadian family practitioner centres. Subsequent management strategies during a 6-month follow-up period were determined by the individual family practitioners.

RESULTS

CSFs were identified in 58% (603/1040) of patients. Erosive oesophagitis was most common (43%; N = 451); peptic ulcer was uncommon (5.3%; N = 55). Alarm symptoms were uncommon (2.8%; N = 29). Most patients had at least three dyspepsia symptoms, more than 80% had at least six, and approximately half had eight or more. Based on the dominant symptom, 463 (45%) patients had ulcer-like, 393 (38%) had reflux-like and 184 (18%) had dysmotility-like dyspepsia. The patients' dominant symptom was not predictive of endoscopic findings. Oesophagitis was more common in those with dominant reflux-like symptoms and was the most common finding in all subgroups. The prevalence of gastroduodenal findings was similar in all symptom subgroups. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection (30%; 301/1013) was associated with gastroduodenal findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Dyspepsia subclassifications, based on dominant symptom, are of limited value in predicting the presence and nature of CSFs. Oesophagitis was by far the most common diagnosis (43% of patients). CSFs were common in uninvestigated dyspepsia patients and their nature suggests patients could be initially treated effectively, without endoscopy, using empirical acid suppressive therapy.

Dyspeptic symptoms in primary care. An observational study in general practice

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Dyspepsia frequently causes patients to consult a general practitioner, but is generally investigated in referral centres. This study describes features of dyspepsia and its relationship with demographic, clinical and socio-economic factors in patients seen by general practitioners in Italy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In Italy, 10 000 general practitioners were asked to recruit up to 10 consecutive dyspeptic patients during a 1-month period. Painful and non-painful dyspeptic symptoms, retrosternal pain/burning and visible abdominal distension were graded 0-3 by a validated questionnaire. Demographics and clinical features were also recorded.

RESULTS

During the test period, 43 446 patients were included (55% were men; 50% were over 45 years old; 49% were smokers; 45% had experienced symptoms for > or = 1 month; 28% had a history of peptic ulcer). Dyspepsia accounted for 8.3% (range 3-11%) of the consultations of a subset of participating doctors. Epigastric pain and fullness were reported in 84% and 79% of patients, respectively. Dyspeptic symptoms were moderate-severe (graded > or = 2) in 69% of patients. Predominant epigastric pain and predominant discomfort were reported in 21% and 25% of the cases, respectively. Male gender, smoking, nocturnal awakening, overlapping reflux symptoms and a history of peptic ulcer were more frequent in patients with predominant pain, while female gender and overlapping abdominal distension were more common in patients with predominant discomfort. Age, educational level and working status were not related to any symptom pattern. Young patients presenting for the first time with uncomplicated dyspepsia accounted for 10% of the dyspepsia workload.

CONCLUSIONS

Dyspepsia accounts for a relevant workload for general practitioners. A considerable overlap exists among digestive symptoms. The proportion of patients that can be empirically treated according to current guidelines may be lower than expected.

One-year prognosis of primary care dyspepsia: predictive value of symptom pattern, Helicobacter pylori and GP management

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Dyspepsia is a highly prevalent, heterogeneous condition with a poorly defined clinical course in family practice. We observed its clinical outcome and identified prognostic factors.

PATIENTS

We studied 583 patients presenting to their general practitioner (GP) with a new episode of dyspeptic complaints.

METHODS

A validated dyspepsia severity score was used to observe deterioration of dyspepsia. Furthermore, the general health status and the patient's perception of no improvement were registered. As prognostic determinants, demographic characteristics, concomitant conditions, and management were studied. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 518 (89%) patients completed the 1-year follow-up. Of these, 111 patients (22%, 95% CI 18% to 25%) had a negative change in their dyspepsia score after 1 year; 46 patients (9%, 95% CI 6% to 11%) noted impairment of general health; and 122 patients (24%, 95% CI 20% to 28%) regarded complaints as not improved. Frequent dyspepsia (>1 episode/year) and a history of peptic ulcer predicted deterioration of dyspepsia, while smoking and little psychological distress predicted impairment of general health. Eradication of Helicobacter pylori reduced the chance of patient's negative judgement for especially those with frequent dyspepsia.

CONCLUSION

One-quarter of the dyspepsia patients had an unfavourable 1-year prognosis, which was predictable because of frequent complaints and previously diagnosed ulcers. Psychological factors need to be identified, since they are related to general health improvement. The observed benefit of H. pylori eradication on perceived improvement of complaints may well be placebo effect.

Testing for Helicobacter pylori in dyspeptic patients suspected of peptic ulcer disease in primary care: cross sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To develop an easily applicable diagnostic scoring method to determine the presence of peptic ulcers in dyspeptic patients in a primary care setting; to evaluate whether Helicobacter pylori testing adds value to history taking.

DESIGN

Cross sectional study.

SETTING

General practitioners' offices in the Utrecht area of the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

565 patients consulting a general practitioner about dyspeptic symptoms of at least two weeks' duration.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The presence or absence of peptic ulcer; independent predictors of the presence of peptic ulcer as obtained from history taking and the added value of H pylori testing were quantified by using multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

A history of peptic ulcer, pain on an empty stomach, and smoking were strong and independent diagnostic determinants of peptic ulcer disease, with odds ratios of 5.5 (95% confidence interval 2.6 to 11.8), 2.8 (1.0 to 4.0), and 2.0 (1.4 to 6.0) respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC area) of these determinants together was 0.71. Adding the H pylori test increased the ROC area only to 0.75. However, in a group of patients at high risk, identified by means of a simple scoring rule based on history taking, the predictive value for the presence of peptic ulcer increased from 16% to 26% after a positive H pylori test.

CONCLUSIONS

In the total group of dyspeptic patients in primary care, H pylori testing has no value in addition to history taking for diagnosing peptic ulcer disease. In a subgroup of patients at high risk of having peptic ulcer disease, however, it might be useful to test for and treat H pylori infections.

Current indications for acid suppressants in dyspepsia

Anti-secretory drug use is common in patients with uninvestigated and functional dyspepsia, but the value of such agents has been controversial. Four large studies have evaluated the symptomatic outcome after a short course of acid inhibition in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia presenting in primary care. All of these studies demonstrated a superior symptom response to proton pump inhibitor therapy compared with placebo and acid-alginates or H(2)-receptor antagonists. In patients with documented functional dyspepsia, 17 parallel group trials have evaluated an H(2)-receptor antagonist against placebo, with mixed results. A recent Cochrane review based on eight controlled trials concluded that there was a significant benefit of H(2)-blockers over placebo with a relative risk reduction of 30%, but as gastro-oesophageal reflux disease was not excluded, the conclusions are questionable. Six controlled studies have compared symptom relief after a short course of proton pump inhibitor therapy compared with placebo. Overall, there does appear to be a therapeutic gain with proton pump inhibitors over placebo, although how much of this is explained by undiagnosed gastro-oesophageal reflux disease remains unclear. There is conflicting evidence on the value of symptom subgrouping as a predictor of response to acid suppression. Overall, there is little convincing evidence that Helicobacter pylori infection influences the therapeutic outcome of acid-suppressant therapy. In conclusion, there appears to be a subgroup of patients with functional dyspepsia who will respond to acid suppression over and above placebo, but further work is required to characterize these responders.

Value of the unaided clinical diagnosis in dyspeptic patients in primary care

OBJECTIVES

Attempts to establish a clinical diagnosis in dyspeptic patients have generally been unrewarding. However, studies in unselected dyspeptic patients are lacking. The aim of this study was to determine the value of the unaided clinical diagnosis by general practitioners (GP) and by experienced gastroenterologists (GA) in unselected dyspeptic patients in primary care.

METHODS

Three hundred forty-seven patients with epigastric pain/discomfort for more than 2 wk who were consulting general practitioners (n = 73), but without alarm symptoms. GPs and GAs gave a provisional diagnosis based on an unstructured interview. All patients underwent endoscopy within 5 days of referral. Validity of the provisional diagnoses was measured using the endoscopic diagnoses as the gold standards.

RESULTS

For GPs, the sensitivity of a provisional diagnosis of peptic ulcer was 61% [95% confidence intervals (CI): 46-74%]; for specificity 73%, the 95% CI was 68-78%; and for positive predictive values, it was 28%, the 95% CI was 20-37%. GAs were more reluctant to predict ulcer, leading to a higher specificity: 84% (95% CI: 79-88%), but a similar sensitivity: 55% (95% CI: 40-69%). The GPs were unable to distinguish between functional and organic dyspepsia (chance-corrected overall validity: 9%; 95% CI: 0-18%). GPs and GAs agreed in their provisional diagnosis in only 45% of the patients, in whom the diagnosis was confirmed by endoscopy in 2/3.

CONCLUSION

The unaided clinical diagnosis given by the GP and by the GA in dyspeptic patients in primary care is unreliable. Nearly half of patients with ulcer or esophagitis were misclassified, despite a high susceptibility to organic disease. Different patients were problematic for GPs and GAs, which may indicate that most dyspeptic patients do not present with symptoms characteristic of a specific disease.

Cost effectiveness of initial endoscopy for dyspepsia in patients over age 50 years: a randomised controlled trial in primary care

BACKGROUND

Dyspepsia can be managed by initial endoscopy and treatment based on endoscopic findings, or by empirical prescribing. We aimed to determine the cost effectiveness of initial endoscopy compared with usual management in patients with dyspepsia over age 50 years presenting to their primary care physician.

METHODS

422 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to initial endoscopy or usual management. Primary outcomes were effect of treatment on dyspepsia symptoms and cost effectiveness. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and patient satisfaction. Total costs were calculated from individual patient's use of resources with unit costs applied from national data. Statistical analysis of uncertainty on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was done along with a sensitivity analysis on unit costs with cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

FINDINGS

In the 12 months following recruitment, 213 (84%) patients had an endoscopy compared with 75 (41%) controls. Initial endoscopy resulted in a significant improvement in symptom score (p=0.03), and quality of life pain dimension (p=0.03), and a 48% reduction in the use of proton pump inhibitors (p=0.005). The ICER was Pound Sterling1728 (UK Pound Sterling) per patient symptom-free at 12 months. The ICER was very sensitive to the cost of endoscopy, and could be reduced to Pound Sterling165 if the unit cost of this procedure fell from Pound Sterling246 to Pound Sterling100.

INTERPRETATION

Initial endoscopy in dyspeptic patients over age 50 might be a cost-effective intervention.

Review article: the continuing dilemma of dyspepsia

Dyspepsia drains a substantial proportion of healthcare resources in industrialized countries and an appropriate management strategy is needed. An aetiological role for Helicobacter pylori infection has been demonstrated in a number of pathological conditions associated with dyspepsia, such as peptic ulcer and gastric malignancies, but not in functional dyspepsia. Endoscopy and diagnosis-based treatment, H. pylori testing and eradication therapy, history taking and empirical therapy, are the main tools that are currently available for managing patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms. Endoscopy identifies malignancies and organic diseases of the proximal gut and therefore provides reassurance to both doctors and patients. It should be recommended in older patients with suspicious symptoms and it has proven to be more cost-effective than empirical H2-receptor antagonists in patients with ulcer-like symptoms. Empirical eradication in all dyspeptics without suspicious symptoms is a cost-effective approach that cures the majority of peptic ulcers. Nevertheless, it does not control symptoms in the majority of patients, it may exacerbate gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, and it encourages antibiotic resistance. The realities of current clinical practice require empirical therapy in most, if not all, the dyspeptics seen by general practitioners. A detailed history taking can help to diagnose gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and to identify suspicious symptoms. Furthermore, identification of dyspepsia subgroups may provide guidance for empirical therapy. Nevertheless, even analysis of individual symptoms does not provide a sufficient diagnostic yield to differentiate functional from organic dyspepsia and appropriate investigations are needed in patients with poor response to short-term therapy or frequent relapses.