Rationale for Investigating Stool Metabolites and Microbiota in Women With Fecal Incontinence

Association of poor oral health status and faecal incontinence in patients with dysphagia: A cross-sectional analysis from the Sarcopenic Dysphagia Database

BACKGROUND

Poor oral health status may alter oral and gut microbiota. Previous studies have shown that poor oral health can exacerbate gut inflammation. Therefore, poor oral health status may be related to faecal incontinence via changes in the gut.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between poor oral health status and faecal incontinence in inpatients with dysphagia.

METHODS

This multicentre cross-sectional study included 423 patients (mean age 79.8 ± 11.5 years, 48.2% female) with dysphagia. Oral health status was assessed at each facility using the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT) or the Revised Oral Assessment Guide (ROAG). Poor oral health status was defined as an OHAT score of ≥3 or a ROAG score of ≥13. A multivariate logistic model was used to analyse the association between poor oral health status and faecal incontinence.

RESULTS

A total of 351 (83.0%) patients had poor oral health and 97 (22.7%) had faecal incontinence. Patients with poor oral health status had a higher proportion of faecal incontinence than those with normal oral health status (25.4% vs. 11.1%, p = .009). A multivariate logistic model revealed an association between faecal incontinence and poor oral health status (adjusted odds ratio = 2.501, 95% confidence interval = 1.065-5.873, p = .035).

CONCLUSIONS

Poor oral health status assessed by OHAT or ROAG in inpatients with dysphagia may adversely affect faecal incontinence. Further studies are needed to determine the causal relationship between poor oral health status and faecal incontinence.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Bile Acid Diarrhea

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Chronic diarrhea affects about 5% of the population overall. Altered bile acid metabolism is a common but frequently undiagnosed cause.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of publication databases for studies of assessment and management of bile acid diarrhea (BAD). The certainty (quality) of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Patient population, intervention, comparator, and outcome questions were developed through an iterative process and were voted on by a group of specialists.

RESULTS

The certainty of evidence was generally rated as very low. Therefore, 16 of 17 recommendations are conditional. In patients with chronic diarrhea, consideration of risk factors (terminal ileal resection, cholecystectomy, or abdominal radiotherapy), but not additional symptoms, was recommended for identification of patients with possible BAD. The group suggested testing using ⁷⁵selenium homocholic acid taurine (where available) or 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one, including patients with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, functional diarrhea, and Crohn's disease without inflammation. Testing was suggested over empiric bile acid sequestrant therapy (BAST). Once remediable causes are managed, the group suggested cholestyramine as initial therapy, with alternate BAST when tolerability is an issue. The group suggested against BAST for patients with extensive ileal Crohn's disease or resection and suggested alternative antidiarrheal agents if BAST is not tolerated. Maintenance BAST should be given at the lowest effective dose, with a trial of intermittent, on-demand administration, concurrent medication review, and reinvestigation for patients whose symptoms persist despite BAST.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a systematic review, BAD should be considered for patients with chronic diarrhea. For patients with positive results from tests for BAD, a trial of BAST, initially with cholestyramine, is suggested.

Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Bile Acid Diarrhea

Background and Aims

Chronic diarrhea affects about 5% of the population overall. Altered bile acid metabolism is a common but frequently undiagnosed cause.

Methods

We performed a systematic search of publication databases for studies of assessment and management of bile acid diarrhea (BAD). The certainty (quality) of evidence and strength of recommendations were rated according to the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Patient population, intervention, comparator and outcome questions were developed through an iterative process and were voted on by a group of specialists.

Results

The certainty of evidence was generally rated as very low. Therefore, 16 of 17 recommendations are conditional. In patients with chronic diarrhea, consideration of risk factors (terminal ileal resection, cholecystectomy or abdominal radiotherapy), but not additional symptoms, was recommended for identification of patients with possible BAD. The group suggested testing using ⁷⁵selenium homocholic acid taurine (where available) or 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one, including patients with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, functional diarrhea and Crohn's disease without inflammation. Testing was suggested over empiric bile acid sequestrant therapy (BAST). Once remediable causes are managed, the group suggested cholestyramine as initial therapy, with alternate BAST when tolerability is an issue. The group suggested against BAST for patients with extensive ileal Crohn's disease or resection and suggested alternative antidiarrheal agents if BAST is not tolerated. Maintenance BAST should be given at the lowest effective dose, with a trial of intermittent, on-demand administration, concurrent medication review and reinvestigation for patients whose symptoms persist despite BAST.

Conclusions

Based on a systematic review, BAD should be considered for patients with chronic diarrhea. For patients with positive results from tests for BAD, a trial of BAST, initially with cholestyramine, is suggested.