Fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs), but not gluten, elicit modest symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized three-way crossover trial

Postprandial symptoms in disorders of gut-brain interaction and their potential as a treatment target

Postprandial, or meal-related, symptoms, such as abdominal pain, early satiation, fullness or bloating, are often reported by patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction, including functional dyspepsia (FD) or irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We propose that postprandial symptoms arise via a distinct pathophysiological process. A physiological or psychological insult, for example, acute enteric infection, leads to loss of tolerance to a previously tolerated oral food antigen. This enables interaction of both the microbiota and the food antigen itself with the immune system, causing a localised immunological response, with activation of eosinophils and mast cells, and release of inflammatory mediators, including histamine and cytokines. These have more widespread systemic effects, including triggering nociceptive nerves and altering mood. Dietary interventions, including a diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols, elimination of potential food antigens or gluten, IgG food sensitivity diets or salicylate restriction may benefit some patients with IBS or FD. This could be because the restriction of these foods or dietary components modulates this pathophysiological process. Similarly, drugs including proton pump inhibitors, histamine-receptor antagonists, mast cell stabilisers or even tricyclic or tetracyclic antidepressants, which have anti-histaminergic actions, all of which are potential treatments for FD and IBS, act on one or more of these mechanisms. It seems unlikely that food antigens driving intestinal immune activation are the entire explanation for postprandial symptoms in FD and IBS. In others, fermentation of intestinal carbohydrates, with gas release altering reflex responses, adverse reactions to food chemicals, central mechanisms or nocebo effects may dominate. However, if the concept that postprandial symptoms arise from food antigens driving an immune response in the gastrointestinal tract in a subset of patients is correct, it is paradigm-shifting, because if the choice of treatment were based on one or more of these therapeutic targets, patient outcomes may be improved.

Assessing 'response' to the low-FODMAP diet in irritable bowel syndrome: Should we be reporting harder primary endpoints?

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The low-FODMAP diet (LFD) has become almost synonymous with IBS care, yet the challenges associated with this rigorous therapeutic approach are often underacknowledged. Despite positive outcomes in RCTs, comparator groups frequently exhibit substantial response rates, raising questions about the definition of 'response'. Whilst the assessment of response in drug trials has evolved to utilize the more stringent FDA/EMA primary clinical endpoints, trials of the LFD have not yet followed. The aim of this article is to opine whether the current approach to the measurement of clinical response to the LFD in clinical trials should be reconsidered.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review of LFD clinical trials from the past decade was conducted, focusing on recorded response metrics for primary clinical endpoints.

RESULTS

While response definitions vary, the 50-point IBS-SSS delta emerged as the predominant metric. Notably, no trials to date have adopted the more stringent primary clinical endpoints used in drug trials. Other response measures included binary response metrics (such as 'adequate clinical response'), changes in visual analogue scales or stool form/output, reductions in abdominal pain, as well as changes the magnitude of the IBS-SSS delta. Whether these metrics correspond to a clinically meaningful improvement for the patient is less clear, and as such aligning patient-clinician expectations can be challenging.

CONCLUSIONS

A paradigm shift in the conceptualization of 'response' coupled with an emphasis on harder clinical endpoints in the context of clinical trials may serve to better justify the trade-off between symptom-improvement and the inherent challenges associated with this burdensome therapeutic approach.

Two randomized crossover multicenter studies investigating gastrointestinal symptoms after bread consumption in individuals with noncoeliac wheat sensitivity: do wheat species and fermentation type matter?

BACKGROUND

Many individuals reduce their bread intake because they believe wheat causes their gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms. Different wheat species and processing methods may affect these responses.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the effects of 6 different bread types (prepared from 3 wheat species and 2 fermentation conditions) on GI symptoms in individuals with self-reported noncoeliac wheat sensitivity (NCWS).

METHODS

Two parallel, randomized, double-blind, crossover, multicenter studies were conducted. NCWS individuals, in whom coeliac disease and wheat allergy were ruled out, received 5 slices of yeast fermented (YF) (study A, n = 20) or sourdough fermented (SF) (study B, n = 20) bread made of bread wheat, spelt, or emmer in a randomized order on 3 separate test days. Each test day was preceded by a run-in period of 3 d of a symptom-free diet and separated by a wash-out period of ≥7 d. GI symptoms were evaluated by change in symptom score (test day minus average of the 3-d run-in period) on a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale (ΔVAS), comparing medians using the Friedman test. Responders were defined as an increase in ΔVAS of ≥15 mm for overall GI symptoms, abdominal discomfort, abdominal pain, bloating, and/or flatulence.

RESULTS

GI symptoms did not differ significantly between breads of different grains [YF bread wheat median ΔVAS 10.4 mm (IQR 0.0-17.8 mm), spelt 4.9 mm (-7.6 to 9.4 mm), emmer 11.0 mm (0.0-21.3 mm), P = 0.267; SF bread wheat 10.5 mm (-3.1 to 31.5 mm), spelt 11.3 mm (0.0-15.3 mm), emmer 4.0 mm (-2.9 to 9.3 mm), P = 0.144]. The number of responders was also comparable for both YF (6 to wheat, 5 to spelt, and 7 to emmer, P = 0.761) and SF breads (9 to wheat, 7 to spelt, and 8 to emmer, P = 0.761).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of NCWS individuals experienced some GI symptoms for ≥1 of the breads, but on a group level, no differences were found between different grains for either YF or SF breads.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04084470 (https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT04084470).

Home-Based Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Challenges for Diagnosis of Delayed Gluten/Milk Hypersensitivity in Children

BACKGROUND

Delayed hypersensitivity to gluten and milk protein is frequently reported but may be difficult to diagnose.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore if a method of home-based double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (H-FC) can identify and reduce unnecessary elimination diets in children.

METHODS

We included 73 of 92 children aged 1 to 17 years referred to a tertiary allergy clinic from 2011 to 2021 due to self-reported, delayed symptoms to gluten or milk. The children were randomized to H-FC, receiving gluten/milk protein or placebo for 5 to 7 days in a double-blind crossover manner, separated by 3 washout weeks. Patients/parents recorded symptoms using standardized forms. Two crossover periods were used from 2011 to 2016 and 3 periods from 2017 to 2021. A positive challenge required significantly more symptoms during the active period versus the placebo period. After the challenge, reintroduction of milk/gluten was assessed by a follow-up interview. The primary outcome was the proportion of children with a positive challenge.

RESULTS

The children, with a mean age of 11 years, had followed a strict gluten-free or milk-protein-free diet for a median duration of 24 months (range: 3-180 months). A positive challenge was observed in 18 of 73 children (25%), more often using 2 (35%) compared with 3 challenge periods (12%). At follow-up, 44 of 55 (80%) children with a negative challenge had successfully reintroduced milk/gluten.

CONCLUSIONS

H-FC may be an effective method in avoiding unnecessary elimination diets in children. Only 25% of the challenges were positive, and 80% of the children with negative challenges succeeded in reintroducing the food. Three challenge periods may be necessary to reduce false-positive outcomes.

Exploration of differential responses to FODMAPs and gluten in people with irritable bowel syndrome- a double-blind randomized cross-over challenge study

INTRODUCTION

There is large variation in response to diet in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and determinants for differential response are poorly understood.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to investigate differential clinical and molecular responses to provocation with fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) and gluten in individuals with IBS.

METHODS

Data were used from a crossover study with week-long interventions with either FODMAPs, gluten or placebo. The study also included a rapid provocation test. Molecular data consisted of fecal microbiota, short chain fatty acids, and untargeted plasma metabolomics. IBS symptoms were evaluated with the IBS severity scoring system. IBS symptoms were modelled against molecular and baseline questionnaire data, using Random Forest (RF; regression and clustering), Parallel Factor Analysis (PARAFAC), and univariate methods.

RESULTS

Regression and classification RF models were in general of low predictive power (Q2 ≤ 0.22, classification rate < 0.73). Out of 864 clustering models, only 2 had significant associations to clusters (0.69 < CR < 0.73, p < 0.05), but with no associations to baseline clinical measures. Similarly, PARAFAC revealed no clear association between metabolome data and IBS symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Differential IBS responses to FODMAPs or gluten exposures could not be explained from clinical and molecular data despite extensive exploration with different data analytical approaches. The trial is registered at www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov as NCT03653689 31/08/2018.

The effect of expectancy versus actual gluten intake on gastrointestinal and extra-intestinal symptoms in non-coeliac gluten sensitivity: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international, multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Many individuals without coeliac disease or wheat allergy reduce their gluten intake because they believe that gluten causes their gastrointestinal symptoms. Symptoms could be affected by negative expectancy. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the effects of expectancy versus actual gluten intake on symptoms in people with non-coeliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS).

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international, multicentre study was done at the University of Leeds (Leeds, UK), Maastricht University (Maastricht, the Netherlands), and Wageningen University and Research (Wageningen, the Netherlands). People aged 18-70 years with self-reported NCGS (ie, gastrointestinal symptoms within 8 h of gluten consumption) without coeliac disease and wheat allergy were recruited. Participants had to follow a gluten-free or gluten-restricted diet for at least 1 week before (and throughout) study participation and had to be asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic (overall gastrointestinal symptom score ≤30 mm on the Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]) while on the diet. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1; blocks of eight; stratified by site and gender) to one of four groups based on the expectation to consume gluten-containing (E+) or gluten-free (E-) oat bread for breakfast and lunch (two slices each) and actual intake of gluten-containing (G+) or gluten-free (G-) oat bread. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were masked to the actual gluten assignment, and participants were also masked to the expectancy part of the study. The primary outcome was overall gastrointestinal symptom score on the VAS, which was measured at and corrected for baseline (before breakfast) and hourly for 8 h, with lunch served after 4 h, and analysed per-protocol. Safety analysis included all participants incorporated in the per-protocol analysis. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05779358, and has ended.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 19, 2018, and Feb 14, 2022, 165 people were screened and 84 were randomly assigned to E+G+ (n=21), E+G- (n=21), E-G+ (n=20), or E-G- (n=22). One person in the E+G+ group was excluded due to not following test day instructions, leaving 83 participants in the per-protocol analysis. Median age was 27·0 years (IQR 21·0-45·0), 71 (86%) of 83 people were women, and 12 (14%) were men. Mean overall gastrointestinal symptom score was significantly higher for E+G+ (16·6 mm [95% CI 13·1 to 20·0]) than for E-G+ (6·9 mm [3·5 to 10·4]; difference 9·6 mm [95% CI 3·0 to 16·2], p=0·0010) and E-G- (7·4 mm [4·2 to 10·7]; difference 9·1 mm [2·7 to 15·6], p=0·0016), but not for E+G- (11·7 mm [8·3 to 15·1]; difference 4·9 mm [-1·7 to 11·5], p=0·28). There was no difference between E+G- and E-G+ (difference 4·7 mm [-1·8 to 11·3], p=0·33), E+G- and E-G- (difference 4·2 mm [-2·2 to 10·7], p=0·47), and E-G+ and E-G- (difference -0·5 mm [-7·0 to 5·9], p=1·0). Adverse events were reported by two participants in the E+G- group (itching jaw [n=1]; feeling lightheaded and stomach rumbling [n=1]) and one participant in the E-G+ group (vomiting).

INTERPRETATION

The combination of expectancy and actual gluten intake had the largest effect on gastrointestinal symptoms, reflecting a nocebo effect, although an additional effect of gluten cannot be ruled out. Our results necessitate further research into the possible involvement of the gut-brain interaction in NCGS.

FUNDING

Government of the Netherlands Topsector Agri & Food Top Consortium for Knowledge and Innovation, AB Mauri Global Bakery Ingredients, Baking Industry Research Trust, Borgesius-Albert Heijn, CSM Innovation Centre, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), DSM Food Specialties, Fazer, Healthgrain Forum, the International Association for Cereal Science and Technology, the International Wheat Gluten Association, Lantmännen, Mondelez International, Nederlands Bakkerij Centrum, Nutrition & Santé, Puratos, Rademaker, Sonneveld Group, and Zeelandia HJ Doeleman.

The Role of Diet in the Management of Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Comprehensive Review

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a highly prevalent gastrointestinal disorder that has a significant impact on the general population. The suboptimal medical treatments available for IBS contribute to its large economic burden. The pathophysiology of IBS is complex, and treatments often focus on managing specific symptoms. Many individuals with IBS associate their symptoms with specific food intake, leading to increased scientific research on the role of diet in managing IBS. Dietary management has become a crucial aspect of IBS treatment, with initial recommendations focusing on adopting a healthy eating pattern and lifestyle. This comprehensive review aims to synthesise the current literature on the impact of diet on IBS, exploring various dietary approaches to managing IBS, including the low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAP) diet, gluten-free diet, Mediterranean diet, and tritordeum-based diet. It presents evidence from both experimental and observational studies and summarises the underlying dietary triggers in IBS, including gut microbiota dysbiosis, visceral hypersensitivity, and immune activation. In addition, it explores the efficacy and limitations of the key diet and lifestyle recommendations provided by dietary guidelines and scientific literature, highlighting the importance of individualised dietary strategies tailored to the unique needs of different types of IBS patients. By elucidating the complex interplay between diet and IBS pathophysiology, this review provides valuable insights into optimising dietary management approaches for improving symptom control and enhancing the quality of life for individuals with IBS.

Gluten restriction in irritable bowel syndrome, yes or no?: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

More than half of patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) report aggravating their symptoms with certain foods. Currently, Low fermentable oligo-, di-, and monosaccharides and polyols diet (LFD) is the most accepted dietary intervention for IBS. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been suggested that gluten restriction may reduce the symptoms of patients with IBS. However, the results from these studies are conflicting. This study filled this knowledge gap by evaluating the impact of the gluten-free diet (GFD) on IBS symptoms.

Methods

A systematic search was carried out in Pubmed/Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science up to April 2023. A random-effect model was applied to estimate the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for each outcome.

Results

A total of nine controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. In contrast to gluten-containing diet, GFD was unable to reduce overall symptoms (SMD - 0.31; 95% CI -0.92, 0.31), bloating (SMD -0.37; 95% CI -1.03, 0.30), and quality of life (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.64, 0.39); but had a slight trend to reduce abdominal pain (SMD -0.68; 95% CI -1.36, -0.00). Also, LFD significantly reduced the IBS-Severity score system (SMD 0.66, 95% CI 0.31, 1.01) and improved quality of life (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.70, -0.01), compared to GFD.

Conclusion

A GFD is not robust enough to be routinely recommended for IBS patients, and its efficacy is significantly lower than that of an LFD. Only a certain subgroup of IBS patients may benefit from GFD; further studies are needed to target this subgroup.

IBS randomized study: FODMAPs alter bile acids, phenolic- and tryptophan metabolites, while gluten modifies lipids

Diet is considered a culprit for symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), although the mechanistic understanding of underlying causes is lacking. Metabolomics, i.e., the analysis of metabolites in biological samples may offer a diet-responsive fingerprint for IBS. Our aim was to explore alterations in the plasma metabolome after interventions with fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) or gluten versus control in IBS, and to relate such alterations to symptoms. People with IBS (n = 110) were included in a double-blind, randomized, crossover study with 1-wk provocations of FODMAPs, gluten, or placebo. Symptoms were evaluated with the IBS severity scoring system (IBS-SSS). Untargeted metabolomics was performed on plasma samples using LC-qTOF-MS. Discovery of metabolite alterations by treatment was performed using random forest followed by linear mixed modeling. Associations were studied using Spearman correlation. The metabolome was affected by FODMAP [classification rate (CR) 0.88, P < 0.0001], but less by gluten intake CR 0.72, P = 0.01). FODMAP lowered bile acids, whereas phenolic-derived metabolites and 3-indolepropionic acid (IPA) were higher compared with placebo. IPA and some unidentified metabolites correlated weakly to abdominal pain and quality of life. Gluten affected lipid metabolism weakly, but with no interpretable relationship to IBS. FODMAP affected gut microbial-derived metabolites relating to positive health outcomes. IPA and unknown metabolites correlated weakly to IBS severity. Minor symptom worsening by FODMAP intake must be weighed against general positive health aspects of FODMAP. The gluten intervention affected lipid metabolism weakly with no interpretable association to IBS severity. Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03653689.NEW & NOTEWORTHY In irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) affected microbial-derived metabolites relating to positive health outcomes such as reduced risk of colon cancer, inflammation, and type 2 diabetes, as shown in previous studies. The minor IBS symptom induction by FODMAP intake must be weighed against the positive health aspects of FODMAP consumption. Gluten affected lipids weakly with no association to IBS severity.

Characteristics of ginsenoside Rd-induced effects on rat intestinal contractility with irritable bowel syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a very common refractory disease. Its exact pathophysiological mechanism is still unclear. Despite the availability of plentiful drugs to control IBS, most patients do not respond well. Ginsenoside Rd is one of the major active components of Panax ginseng, which has been verified to produce various pharmacological actions. However, the role of ginsenoside Rd in modulating smooth muscle contractility is still undefined. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of ginsenoside Rd on intestinal contractility and related mechanisms in IBS.

Effects of FODMAPs and Gluten on Gut Microbiota and Their Association with the Metabolome in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Cross-Over Intervention Study

BACKGROUND

A mechanistic understanding of the effects of dietary treatment in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is lacking. Our aim was therefore to investigate how fermentable oligo- di-, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) and gluten affected gut microbiota and circulating metabolite profiles, as well as to investigate potential links between gut microbiota, metabolites, and IBS symptoms.

METHODS

We used data from a double-blind, randomized, crossover study with week-long provocations of FODMAPs, gluten, and placebo in participants with IBS. To study the effects of the provocations on fecal microbiota, fecal and plasma short-chain fatty acids, the untargeted plasma metabolome, and IBS symptoms, we used Random Forest, linear mixed model and Spearman correlation analysis.

RESULTS

FODMAPs increased fecal saccharolytic bacteria, plasma phenolic-derived metabolites, 3-indolepropionate, and decreased isobutyrate and bile acids. Gluten decreased fecal isovalerate and altered carnitine derivatives, CoA, and fatty acids in plasma. For FODMAPs, modest correlations were observed between microbiota and phenolic-derived metabolites and 3-indolepropionate, previously associated with improved metabolic health, and reduced inflammation. Correlations between molecular data and IBS symptoms were weak.

CONCLUSIONS

FODMAPs, but not gluten, altered microbiota composition and correlated with phenolic-derived metabolites and 3-indolepropionate, with only weak associations with IBS symptoms. Thus, the minor effect of FODMAPs on IBS symptoms must be weighed against the effect on microbiota and metabolites related to positive health factors.

Microbial inulinase promotes fructan hydrolysis under simulated gastric conditions

Fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs) have emerged as key contributors to digestive discomfort and intolerance to certain vegetables, fruits, and plant-based foods. Although strategies exist to minimize FODMAP consumption and exposure, exogenous enzyme supplementation targeting the fructan-type FODMAPs has been underexploited. The objective of this study was to test the hydrolytic efficacy of a food-grade, non-genetically engineered microbial inulinase preparation toward inulin-type fructans in the INFOGEST in vitro static simulation of gastrointestinal (GI) digestion. Purified inulin was shown to undergo acid-mediated hydrolysis at high gastric acidity as well as predominantly inulinase-mediated hydrolysis at lower gastric acidity. Inulinase dose-response simulations of inulin, garlic, and high-fructan meal digestion in the gastric phase suggest that as little as 50 inulinase units (INU) and up to 800 INU per serving promote fructan hydrolysis better than the control simulations without inulinase. Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) profiling of fructo-oligosaccharides (FOS) in the gastric digestas following inulinase treatment confirms the fructolytic activity of inulinase under simulated digestive conditions. Altogether, these in vitro digestion data support the use of microbial inulinase as an exogenous enzyme supplement for reducing dietary fructan-type FODMAP exposure.

Current evidence for dietary therapies in irritable bowel syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diet appears to trigger symptoms in the majority of individuals with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and is associated with a reduced quality of life. There has been a recent focus on the role of dietary therapies to manage individuals with IBS. The aim of this review is to discuss the utility of traditional dietary advice (TDA), low-FODMAP diet (LFD) and gluten-free diet (GFD) in IBS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published demonstrating the efficacy of the LFD and GFD in IBS, with the evidence base for TDA being predominantly based on clinical experience, with emerging RCTs evaluating TDA. Only one RCT has been published to date comparing TDA, LFD and GFD head to head, with no difference noted between diets in terms of efficacy. However, TDA has been noted to be more patient-friendly and is commonly implemented as a first-line dietary therapy.

SUMMARY

Dietary therapies have been demonstrated to improve symptoms in patients with IBS. In view of insufficient evidence to recommend one diet over another currently, specialist dietetic input in conjunction with patient preference is required to determine implementation of dietary therapies. Novel methods of dietetic delivery are required in view of the lack of dietetic provision to deliver these therapies.

Low FODMAP diet reduces gastrointestinal symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome and clinical response could be predicted by symptom severity: A randomized crossover trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs) can provoke symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We aimed to compare the effects of diets with low vs. moderate FODMAP content on gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and bowel habits, and to identify possible predictors of clinical response to a low FODMAP diet and FODMAP sensitivity in IBS.

METHODS

Adult participants with IBS (Rome IV criteria, n = 29) were included and adhered to two 7-day diet periods, with either low (4 g/day) or moderate (23 g/day) amounts of FODMAPs, in this randomized, double-blind, crossover study. The periods were separated by a wash-out period (≥14 days). IBS-Severity Scoring System (IBS-SSS) and a stool diary (Bristol Stool Form) were completed before and after the diet periods. At baseline, severity of GI symptoms and gut microbial fermentation were assessed (every 15 min, 4 h) during the Lactulose Nutrient Challenge Test (LNCT). Clinical response and FODMAP sensitivity were defined by reduction after low FODMAP period, and increase after moderate FODMAP period in IBS-SSS (≥50 points), respectively.

RESULTS

Severity of GI symptoms (P = 0.04), stool consistency (P = 0.01), and stool frequency (P = 0.01) differed between the interventions, with reduced overall GI symptom severity, abdominal pain intensity and frequency, bowel habits dissatisfaction, and daily life interference (P < 0.05 for all), as well as more firm (P = 0.03) and less frequent (P < 0.01) stools after low FODMAP intervention, but not after moderate FODMAP intervention. A third (34%) responded clinically to the low FODMAP diet, and the response could be predicted by higher IBS-SSS at baseline (P = 0.02). Although modest associations between FODMAP sensitivity (22%) and GI symptoms during LNCT were observed, no independent predictors could be identified.

CONCLUSIONS

A diet low in FODMAPs reduces GI symptoms and affects bowel habits in IBS, compared with a moderate FODMAP diet. Assessment of IBS severity before the intervention may be used to predict clinical response to a low FODMAP diet. Trial registry (http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov): Registered under Clinical Trial number NCT05182593.

Modest Conformity Between Self-Reporting of Bristol Stool Form and Fecal Consistency Measured by Stool Water Content in Irritable Bowel Syndrome and a FODMAP and Gluten Trial

INTRODUCTION

Altered bowel habits constitute a criterion of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), with the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS) as the recommended tool for assessment of fecal consistency. However, BSFS is devoid of a comprehensive objective evaluation in subjects with IBS. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the concordance between subjective reporting of BSFS and objective stool water content in subjects with IBS. Furthermore, we evaluated whether intake of fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) or gluten would affect stool water content.

METHODS

Data from a previous crossover trial in IBS with 1-week provocations of FODMAPs, gluten, or placebo were subanalyzed. After each intervention, fecal consistency was subjectively assessed using the BSFS and stool samples were collected. The stool water content was analyzed, where ≤68.5% water content was classified as hard stool, while ≥78% was classified as diarrhea.

RESULTS

BSFS correlated to stool water content ( r = 0.36, P < 0.0001). The BSFS score increased in parallel with increasing water content, but with considerable overlap between BSFS scores. Stool water content differed between the BSFS categories 1-2, 3-5, and 6-7 (hard, normal, and loose, respectively) ( P < 0.0001). For BSFS categories 1-2, 77% had water content ≤68.5%, whereas for BSFS categories 6-7, 52% had water content ≥78%. There was no difference in stool water content after consumption of FODMAPs, gluten, or placebo ( P = 0.94).

DISCUSSION

Subjective reporting of BSFS conforms only modestly with stool water content in IBS, warranting caution when subtyping IBS according to the BSFS. High intake of FODMAPs and gluten does not affect stool water content.

Diet and irritable bowel syndrome: an update from a UK consensus meeting

There has been a renewed interest in the role of dietary therapies to manage irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), with diet high on the agenda for patients. Currently, interest has focussed on the use of traditional dietary advice (TDA), a gluten-free diet (GFD) and the low FODMAP diet (LFD). A consensus meeting was held to assess the role of these dietary therapies in IBS, in Sheffield, United Kingdom.Evidence for TDA is from case control studies and clinical experience. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) have demonstrated the benefit of soluble fibre in IBS. No studies have assessed TDA in comparison to a habitual or sham diet. There have been a number of RCTs demonstrating the efficacy of a GFD at short-term follow-up, with a lack of long-term outcomes. Whilst gluten may lead to symptom generation in IBS, other components of wheat may also play an important role, with recent interest in the role of fructans, wheat germ agglutinins, as well as alpha amylase trypsin inhibitors. There is good evidence for the use of a LFD at short-term follow-up, with emerging evidence demonstrating its efficacy at long-term follow-up. There is overlap between the LFD and GFD with IBS patients self-initiating gluten or wheat reduction as part of their LFD. Currently, there is a lack of evidence to suggest superiority of one diet over another, although TDA is more acceptable to patients.In view of this evidence, our consensus group recommends that dietary therapies for IBS should be offered by dietitians who first assess dietary triggers and then tailor the intervention according to patient choice. Given the lack of dietetic services, novel approaches such as employing group clinics and online webinars may maximise capacity and accessibility for patients. Further research is also required to assess the comparative efficacy of dietary therapies to other management strategies available to manage IBS.

Low FODMAP diet in irritable bowel syndrome: a review of recent clinical trials and meta-analyses

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyol (FODMAP) diet is widely used in the dietary management of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The aim of this review is to summarize recent evidence regarding the use of the low FODMAP diet in IBS and other gastrointestinal disorders from recent clinical trials and meta-analyses.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses support the use of low FODMAP restriction for global symptoms in IBS in the short term. Uncontrolled follow-up studies show that at least 50% of individuals experience symptom relief following restriction, reintroduction and personalization in the long term. Although evidence from comparative trials in IBS suggests potential benefit of less burdensome approaches (e.g. standard IBS diet and low lactose diet) many studies are insufficiently powered. One established mechanism is colonic gas production that may induce pain signalling measurable in the brain, however altered gastrointestinal epithelial integrity and shifts in microbiome composition and function may also be involved.

SUMMARY

Quality trials of the low FODMAP diet are emerging and have been transformational in supporting the widespread application to IBS management in some areas (e.g. short-term effectiveness), whereas other areas still require considerable improvements in research evidence (e.g. long-term effectiveness, mechanisms and educational delivery).