Systematic review: the methodological quality of trials affects estimates of treatment efficacy in functional (non-ulcer) dyspepsia

Immunopathological and molecular basis of functional dyspepsia and current therapeutic approaches

INTRODUCTION

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is widespread with 20% prevalence worldwide and a significant economic burden due to health care cost and constraints on daily activities of patients. Despite extensive investigation, the underlying causes of dyspepsia in a majority of patients remain unknown. Common complaints include abdominal discomfort, pain, burning, nausea, early satiety, and bloating. Motor dysfunction of the gut was long considered a major cause, but recent investigations suggest immune-based pathophysiological and molecular events in the duodenum are more probable contributing factors. Areas Covered: Inflammatory mediators and immune cells including duodenal eosinophils, intraepithelial lymphocytes, and T-cells have been implicated in the underlying cause of disease process, as have genetic factors. In this article, we critically reviewed findings, identified gaps in knowledge and suggested future directions for further investigation to identify targets and develop better therapeutic approaches. Expert commentary: Impaired gastric accommodation, slow gastric emptying, and increased visceral sensitivity have long been thought of as main causal factors of FD. However, more recent identification of eosinophilic degranulation and recruitment of T cells that induce mild duodenal inflammation are giving rise to new insights into immune-mediated pathophysiology. These insights offer promising avenues to explore for immune-mediated therapy in the future.

Proton pump inhibitors for functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD or non-ulcer dyspepsia) is defined as continuous or frequently recurring epigastric pain or discomfort for which no organic cause can be found. Acid suppressive therapy, including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), has been proposed as a therapeutic option in FD, but its efficacy remains controversial. While PPIs are generally considered safe and well tolerated, they have been associated with adverse events, especially in the long term. For this reason, decisions on whether to initiate or continue PPI therapy should be made based on an appropriate clinical indication. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate whether PPI therapy provides symptomatic relief in FD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in the improvement of global symptoms of dyspepsia and quality of life compared to placebo, H2 receptor antagonists or prokinetics, in people with functional dyspepsia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched in the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Library (to May 2017), MEDLINE (OvidSP; to May 2017), Embase (OvidSP; to May 2017), and SIGLE grey literature (up to May 2017) and clinical trial registries; we handsearched abstracts from conferences up to May 2017. We screened non-systematic reviews, systematic reviews and guidelines to identify any additional trials. We contacted trialists to obtain missing information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any PPI with placebo, H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) or prokinetics for the treatment of FD of at least two weeks' duration. Participants were adults (aged 16 years or greater) with an adequate diagnosis of FD (any validated criteria such as Rome I, II, III or Lancet Working Group).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and trial quality, and extracted data. We collected data on dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life and number of overall adverse events. Specific adverse events were beyond the scope of this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 25 RCTs from 27 papers (with 8453 participants) studying the effect of PPIs versus placebo, H2RAs or prokinetics for improvement of global symptoms of dyspepsia and quality of life in people with FD. Low-dose PPIs had similar efficacy as standard-dose PPIs, therefore we combined these subgroups for the analysis. PPI was more effective than placebo at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms in people with FD (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.94; participants = 6172; studies = 18; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 11; moderate quality evidence). PPIs may have little or no effect compared with H2RAs (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.04; participants = 740; studies = 2; low quality evidence), and may be slightly more effective than prokinetics (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99; participants = 1033; studies = 5; NNTB 16; low quality evidence) at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms in people with FD. PPIs plus prokinetics have probably little or no effect compared with PPIs alone at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.08; participants = 407; studies = 2; moderate quality evidence).There was no difference when subgrouped by Helicobacter pylori status, country of origin, or presence of reflux or Rome III subtypes. There were no differences in the number of adverse events observed between PPIs and any of the other treatments. There were fewer adverse events in the combination of PPI plus prokinetics compared to prokinetics alone (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.93; participants = 407; studies = 2; moderate quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that PPIs are effective for the treatment of FD, independent of the dose and duration of treatment compared with placebo. PPIs may be slightly more effective than prokinetics for the treatment of FD; however, the evidence is scarce. The trials evaluating PPIs versus prokinetics are difficult to interpret as they are at risk of bias. Although the effect of these drugs seems to be small, the drugs are well tolerated.

Search for unpublished data by systematic reviewers: an audit

OBJECTIVES

We audited a selection of systematic reviews published in 2013 and reported on the proportion of reviews that researched for unpublished data, included unpublished data in analysis and assessed for publication bias.

DESIGN

Audit of systematic reviews.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2013 for the following journals: Journal of the American Medical Association, The British Medical Journal, Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also searched the Cochrane Library and included 100 randomly selected Cochrane reviews.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Systematic reviews published in 2013 in the selected journals were included. Methodological reviews were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently reviewed each included systematic review. The following data were extracted: whether the review searched for grey literature or unpublished data, the sources searched, whether unpublished data were included in analysis, whether publication bias was assessed and whether there was evidence of publication bias.

MAIN FINDINGS

203 reviews were included for analysis. 36% (73/203) of studies did not describe any attempt to obtain unpublished studies or to search grey literature. 89% (116/130) of studies that sought unpublished data found them. 33% (68/203) of studies included an assessment of publication bias, and 40% (27/68) of these found evidence of publication bias.

CONCLUSION

A significant fraction of systematic reviews included in our study did not search for unpublished data. Publication bias may be present in almost half the published systematic reviews that assessed for it. Exclusion of unpublished data may lead to biased estimates of efficacy or safety in systematic reviews.

Research in Nursing and Nutrition: Is Randomized Clinical Trial the Actual Gold Standard?

The aim of this study was to assess the quality of reporting of nurse-driven randomized controlled trials involving a direct nutritional intervention. A bibliometric search for randomized controlled trials involving a direct nutritional intervention from 1991 to 2011 in nursing research was conducted. Both quality of the study and design aspects were evaluated. The prevalent randomized controlled trial design used is 2-arm parallel, individual, and randomized with a continuous primary endpoint. Global numbers of randomized controlled trials and the proportion of good-quality randomized controlled trials began a steady and marked rise, more than doubling, from the 1990s to about 2001 and increased slowly thereafter. Studies are overall sufficiently well designed, although there is still room for quality improvement. Additionally, implementation of new randomized controlled trial designs exists and should be advocated.

Proton pump inhibitors for functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD or non-ulcer dyspepsia) is defined as continuous or frequently recurring epigastric pain or discomfort for which no organic cause can be found. Acid suppressive therapy, including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), has been proposed as a therapeutic option in FD, but its efficacy remains controversial. While PPIs are generally considered safe and well tolerated, they have been associated with adverse events, especially in the long term. For this reason, decisions on whether to initiate or continue PPI therapy should be made based on an appropriate clinical indication. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate whether PPI therapy provides symptomatic relief in FD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in the improvement of global symptoms of dyspepsia and quality of life compared to placebo, H2 receptor antagonists or prokinetics, in people with functional dyspepsia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched in the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Library (to January 2016), MEDLINE (OvidSP; to February 2016), Embase (OvidSP; to February 2016), and SIGLE grey literature (up to February 2016) and clinical trial registries; we handsearched abstracts from conferences up to February 2016. We screened non-systematic reviews, systematic reviews and guidelines to identify any additional trials. We contacted trialists to obtain missing information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any PPI with placebo, H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) or prokinetics for the treatment of FD. Participants were adults (aged 16 years or greater) with an adequate diagnosis of FD (any validated criteria such as Rome I, II, III or Lancet Working Group).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility, trial quality and extracted data. We collected data on dyspeptic symptoms, quality of life and number of overall adverse events. Specific adverse events were beyond the scope of this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 23 RCTs from 22 papers (with 8759 participants) studying the effect of PPIs versus placebo, H2RAs or prokinetics for improvement of global symptoms of dyspepsia and quality of life in people with FD. Low-dose PPIs had similar efficacy as standard-dose PPIs, therefore we combined these subgroups for the analysis. Two to eight weeks of therapy with PPI was slightly more effective than placebo at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms in people with FD (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.94; participants = 5968; studies = 16; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 13; moderate quality evidence). PPIs may be slightly more effective than H2RAs (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.04; participants = 740; studies = 2, NNTB 13; low quality evidence), and slightly more effective than prokinetics (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.00; participants = 892; studies = 4; NNTB 20; low quality evidence) at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms in people with FD. PPIs plus prokinetics were possibly slightly more effective than PPIs alone at relieving overall dyspepsia symptoms (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.08; participants = 407; studies = 2; NNTB 18; moderate quality evidence).The was no difference when subgrouped by Helicobacter pylori status, country of origin, or presence of reflux or Rome III subtypes. There were no differences in the number of adverse events observed between PPIs and any of the other treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that PPIs are effective for the treatment of FD, independent of the dose and duration of treatment compared with placebo. PPIs may be slightly more effective than H2RAs for the treatment of FD; however, the evidence is scarce. The trials evaluating PPIs versus prokinetics are difficult to interpret as they are at risk of bias. Although the effect of these drugs seems to be small, the drugs are well tolerated.

Efficacy and safety of jollab to treat functional dyspepsia: a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common gastrointestinal disease that is highly prevalent worldwide. Because of its heterogeneous pathophysiology, treatment options for FD can be difficult to choose; in this context, complementary and alternative medicine modalities have been suggested as promising options.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of a traditional Persian medicine, jollab, in reducing patients' FD symptoms.

METHODS

In a double-blind randomized clinical trial, 160 patients with a diagnosis of FD were enrolled and treated with either jollab or placebo (15ml, t.i.d., four weeks, orally). The outcomes reported were changes in symptom frequency and severity as recorded in patients' diaries and evaluated with the Short Form of the Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire (SF-LDQ), and physical examination.

RESULTS

The response rate was higher in the treatment group (78%) than in the placebo group (31%) according to per-protocol sample analysis (P < .001). Symptoms of FD disappeared significantly more frequently, and the rate of concomitant synthetic drug consumption was significantly lower, in the jollab group compared to the placebo group at the end of the trial. Mean total symptom frequency and severity according to the SF-LDQ score was 1.55 ± 2.78 in the treatment group versus 5.61 ± 3.80 in the placebo group at the last follow-up time point (P < .001). A promising safety profile for jollab was observed throughout the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with FD, jollab appeared to be more effective than the placebo. Complementary and alternative therapies such as the use of this traditional medicinal substance may be beneficial in relieving symptoms of dyspepsia [ACTRN12613000584730].

Review of the literature and individual patients' data meta-analysis on efficacy and tolerance of nitroxoline in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections

BACKGROUND

Nitroxoline, a hydroxychinoline derivate, has been used for many years to treat urinary tract infections (UTI). Many uncontrolled, but only few controlled clinical studies have been published. Four so far unpublished, controlled clinical studies were meta-analysed.

METHODS

A narrative literature review was performed. In addition the individual patient data (IPD) of 466 females with uncomplicated UTI of four prospective, single blind, randomized, clinical studies with similar protocols using nitroxoline (250 mg tid) versus cotrimoxazole (960 mg bid) or norfloxacin (400 mg bid) as controls for 5 days (sporadic UTI) or 10 days (recurrent UTI) were meta-analysed. The primary aim was eradication of bacteriuria 7-13 days after end of therapy (test of cure). Clinical efficacy was determined by elimination of symptoms and safety by adverse events and laboratory tests.

RESULTS

Reviewing a total of 26 uncontrolled, 2 controlled and one postmarketing studies including more than 11,000 patients, good efficacy and safety of nitroxoline could be confirmed. In the four unpublished controlled studies a total of 234 patients were treated orally with nitroxoline and 232 with controls. The safety of nitroxoline was very good and comparable to the controls (adverse events 9.4% vs 7.8%; p = 0.360). In the mMITT set (at least one outcome result), in the PP set (test of cure outcome) and in the modified PP set (missing test of cure rated failure) more than 90% of the patients showed eradication of bacteriuria with nitroxoline, which also met statistical non-inferiority compared to the controls (10% non-inferiority margin) in all three evaluation sets. The clinical efficacy was similar between the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

The IPD meta-analysis using objective parameters (elimination of bacteriuria) demonstrated equivalent efficacy (non-inferiority) of nitroxoline with the controls tested (cotrimoxazole, norfloxacin) in the treatment of uncomplicated UTI. Considering the good safety and efficacy of nitroxoline as also shown in many uncontrolled and observational studies and the world wide increase of resistance of uropathogens against cotrimoxazole and fluoroquinolones, but not against nitroxoline within the last 20 years, nitroxoline should be reconsidered as one of the first line antibiotics for the treatment of uncomplicated UTI.

Dyspepsia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Dyspepsia affects up to 40% of the general population and significantly reduces quality of life. A small proportion of patients have peptic ulcer disease as cause and this can be treated empirically with Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy in those that are infected. Approximately 20% have gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and this can be effectively treated with proton pump inhibitor therapy. Patients who remain symptomatic may warrant an endoscopy, but most will have functional dyspepsia. Treatment of functional dyspepsia remains a challenge.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent large randomized trials suggest tricyclic antidepressant therapy may be effective in functional dyspepsia. A phase III randomized controlled trial reports that a new prokinetic, acotiamide, reduces dyspepsia symptoms in functional dyspepsia patients. There are also preliminary data that suggest buspirone, a drug that promotes gastric accommodation, is also effective in functional dyspepsia. There are also data to suggest that functional dyspepsia is caused by subtle manifestations of inflammation in the upper gastrointestinal tract, possibly caused by food sensitivity or a change in gut flora.

SUMMARY

The initial management of dyspepsia is well established, but managing those with continued symptoms is a challenge. Antidepressants and newer gastric motility agents show promise. Targeting the diet and gut microbiome is another area for future research in functional dyspepsia.

Helicobacter pylori infection in functional dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia is the most common reason for patients to experience chronic epigastric pain or discomfort. The causes of functional dyspepsia are multifactorial but Helicobacter pylori infection is one likely candidate. Infection with this bacterial pathogen clearly results in chronic mucosal inflammation in the stomach and duodenum, which, in turn, might lead to abnormalities in gastroduodenal motility and sensitivity. Chronic gastritis might also affect a variety of endocrine functions of the stomach including the production of the gastrointestinal hormones and neurotransmitters somatostatin, gastrin and ghrelin. Although these abnormalities might generate symptoms in some patients with functional dyspepsia, the clinical evidence needs to be critically evaluated before this hypothesis can be confirmed. A Cochrane review reported that eradication of H. pylori in these patients had a small but statistically significant long-term effect on symptom relief when compared with placebo, lasting at least 12 months after 1 week of eradication therapy. The efficacy of eradication therapy was seen in all symptom subtypes of functional dyspepsia, but was more marked in Asian than Western patients. This evidence has led to alterations in most of the major guidelines throughout the world, which now recommend H. pylori eradication in patients with functional dyspepsia if they test positive for this bacterium.

[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/).

Dyspepsia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A variety of organic diseases can cause dyspepsia, but most patients with epigastric pain have functional dyspepsia. As dyspepsia is common and usually has a benign cause, it is not possible to fully investigate everyone with epigastric pain. Current recommendations suggest that young patients without alarm symptoms can be treated empirically with Helicobacter pylori test and treat and proton pump inhibitor therapy can be offered to those who are negative or remain symptomatic despite treatment for their H. pylori. Patients who remain symptomatic with this strategy may be investigated with endoscopy, but most will have functional dyspepsia.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are a large number of trials for prokinetic therapy in functional dyspepsia, but treatment efficacy is uncertain, as there is evidence of publication bias. There are very limited data for the effectiveness of tricyclic antidepressants in functional dyspepsia. There has been recent interest in the observation that patients with functional dyspepsia have increased eosinophils in the duodenum and this may be accompanied by other subtle manifestations of upregulated mucosal immunity. It is possible that this is being driven by a dietary substance or by a change in the upper gut microbiome.

SUMMARY

The initial management of dyspepsia is well established, but how to manage those who do not respond is a challenge. Future studies evaluating diet and altering the gut microbiome may give clinicians more therapeutic options.

WITHDRAWN: Pharmacological interventions for non-ulcer dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

The commonest cause of upper gastrointestinal symptoms is non-ulcer dyspepsia (NUD) and yet the pathophysiology of this condition has been poorly characterised and the optimum treatment is uncertain. It is estimated that £450 million is spent on dyspepsia drugs in the UK each year.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to determine the effectiveness of six classes of drugs (antacids, histamine H2 antagonists, proton pump inhibitors, prokinetics, mucosal protecting agents and antimuscarinics) in the improvement of either the individual or global dyspepsia symptom scores and also quality of life scores patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2006), EMBASE (1988 to January 2006), CINAHL (1982 to January 2006), SIGLE, and reference lists of articles. We also contacted experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies. Trials were located through electronic searches of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCTR), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and SIGLE, using appropriate subject headings and text words, searching bibliographies of retrieved articles, and through contacts with experts in the fields of dyspepsia and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing drugs of any of the six groups with each other or with placebo for non-ulcer dyspepsia (NUD).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility, trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 73 trials: prokinetics (19 trials with dichotomous outcomes evaluating 3178 participants; relative risk reduction (RRR) 33%; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 18% to 45%), H(2)RAs (12 trials evaluating 2,183 participants; RRR 23%; 95% CI 8% to 35%) and PPIs (10 trials evaluating 3,347 participants; RRR 13%; 95% CI 4% to 20%) were significantly more effective than placebo. Bismuth salts (six trials evaluating 311 participants; RRR 40%; 95% CI -3 to 65%) were superior to placebo but this was of marginal statistical significance. Antacids (one trial evaluating 109 participants; RRR -2%; 95% CI -36% to 24%) and sucralfate (two trials evaluating 246 participants; RRR 29%; 95% CI -40% to 64%) were not statistically significantly superior to placebo. A funnel plot suggested that the prokinetic results could be due to publication bias or other small study effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that anti-secretory therapy may be effective in NUD. The trials evaluating prokinetic therapy are difficult to interpret as the meta-analysis result could have been due to publication bias. The effect of these drugs is likely to be small and many patients will need to take them on a long-term basis so economic analyses would be helpful and ideally the therapies assessed need to be inexpensive and well tolerated.

Effect of Pharmaceutical Care Programs on Glycemic Control in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background:

Diabetes mellitus is a common disease that has an increasing influence on the health of human beings. While the role of pharmaceutical care (PC) programs in the treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus is well established, there is little research that quantitatively and comprehensively assesses the impact of PC programs on glycemic control in diabetics.

Objective:

To evaluate the effect of PC programs on glycemic control in patients with diabetes mellitus.

Methods:

Publications on PC programs and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of glycemic control were retrieved by searching MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, Elsevier, Chinese Biomedicine Database, and Chinese Journal Full-Text Database databases from January 1996 through February 2010. Data were extracted by 2 reviewers independently, based on their correlation with this project, and then evaluated with meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted using STATA version 10.1. Begg-Mazumdar's funnel plot was generated to determine the potential impact of publication bias.

Results:

Fourteen RCTs, with a total of 1770 patients with diabetes mellitus, were included in this meta-analysis. Pharmacists were involved in all of these PC interventions. The average ± SD study period of included trials was 9.5 ± 4.1 months. Drug counseling, drug therapy management, lifestyles education, self-monitoring, and recommendations of drug therapy changes were the most frequently used interventions. All of the trials reported the reduction of hemoglobin A1c (A1C) as the primary clinical outcome of PC intervention. Compared with the usual-care control groups, the PC intervention groups had significant reduction in A1C levels (weighted mean difference −0.68; 95% CI-1.03 to −0.34; p = 0.000).

Conclusions:

PC programs delivered separately or in combination by pharmacists and other health professionals can lead to an improvement in glycemic control. The incorporation of PC programs into disease management should be strongly considered.

Observational comparative trial of the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors versus histamine-2 receptor antagonists for uninvestigated dyspepsia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

It is still controversial which drugs, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) or histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RA), are more effective for dyspepsia in the Japanese population.

METHODS

Patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia (n = 104; male/female 41/63) were treated with either rabeprazole 10 mg o.d. (n = 62) or lafutidine 10 mg b.i.d. (n = 42) for 4 weeks. Questionnaires (modified Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease [mFSSG] and quality of life [QOL], SF-8) were administered before and after therapy. The mFSSG was classified into a total score (Q-T), reflux score (Q-R), dyspepsia score (Q-D) and pain score (Q-P). The SF-8 had a physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). The predominant type of symptom was reflux (R-S), pain (P-S) or dysmotility (D-S).

RESULTS

R-S was 19.2%, P-S 48.1%, D-S 24.0% and overlap 8.7%. In the R-S, Q-T and Q-R significantly improved with rabeprazole, but neither scale improved with lafutidine. MCS significantly improved with rabeprazole. In P-S, Q-T, Q-R, Q-D and Q-P significantly improved with both drugs. PCS significantly improved with both, whereas the MCS significant improved with rabeprazole. In D-S, Q-R and Q-D significant improved with rabeprazole, but neither improved with lafutidine. QOL did not improve with either. With overlap, neither scale nor the QOL reached a significant difference.

CONCLUSION

Both PPI and H2RA have a positive effect on P-S, but H(2)RA therapy is limited for R-S and D-S, whereas PPI therapy is generally effective. Therefore, careful prescription based on symptoms is important.

The nitric oxide synthase inhibitor, Ng-nitro-L-arginine-methyl-ester, attenuates the delay in gastric emptying induced by hyperglycaemia in healthy humans

The aim of this study was to determine whether the nitric oxide (NO) synthase inhibitor, N(g)-nitro-L-arginine-methyl-ester (L-NAME), reverses the effects of acute hyperglycaemia on gastric emptying and antropyloroduodenal (APD) motility. The study had a four-way randomized crossover (hyperglycaemia vs euglycaemia; L-NAME vs placebo) design in a clinical laboratory setting. Seven healthy volunteers [four males; age 30.3 +/- 3.8 years; body mass index (BMI) 23.6 +/- 1.2 kg m(-2)] were the study subjects. After positioning a transnasal manometry catheter across the pylorus, the blood glucose concentration was maintained at either 15 or 5 mmol L(-1) using a glucose/insulin clamp. An intravenous infusion of L-NAME (180 microg kg(-1 )h(-1)) or placebo (0.9% saline) was commenced (T = -30 min) and continued for 150 min. At T = -2 min, subjects ingested a drink containing 50 g of glucose made up to 300 mL with water. Gastric emptying was measured using 3D ultrasound, and APD motility using manometry. Hyperglycaemia slowed gastric emptying (P < 0.05), and this effect was abolished by L-NAME. L-NAME had no effect on gastric emptying during euglycaemia. Hyperglycaemia suppressed fasting antral motility [motility index: 3.9 +/- 0.8 (hyperglycaemia) vs 6.5 +/- 0.6 (euglycaemia); P < 0.01]; l-NAME suppressed postprandial antral motility [motility index: 3.6 +/- 0.2 (L-NAME) vs 5.1 +/- 0.2 (placebo); P < 0.001]. Postprandial basal pyloric pressure was higher during hyperglycaemia (P < 0.001), and lower after administration of L-NAME (P < 0.001). Slowing of gastric emptying induced by hyperglycaemia is mediated by NO, and may involve the modulation of tonic pyloric activity.

Managing dyspepsia

The prevalence of dyspepsia in the general population is as high as 40%, and its management represents a considerable financial burden to the health care system. Causes of dyspepsia amenable to medical therapy include peptic ulcer and functional dyspepsia, and testing for Helicobacter pylori and treating positive individuals is beneficial in both conditions. Individuals presenting for the first time with uninvestigated dyspepsia, age greater than 50 years, or alarm features require upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy to exclude gastroesophageal malignancy. Upper GI endoscopy for younger individuals without alarm features is not cost-effective compared with the "test and treat" approach. Test and treat and empirical acid-suppression using a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) have similar costs and effects. Recent evidence suggests that empirical acid suppression commencing with antacids is as effective as PPI. Screening and treatment of H. pylori in PPI users and the community may reduce the costs of managing dyspepsia.

Whither dyspepsia? A historical perspective of functional dyspepsia, and concepts of pathogenesis and therapy in 2009

Functional dyspepsia is a highly prevalent but heterogeneous disorder; multiple pathogenetic mechanisms are likely involved but the underlying causal pathways in functional dyspepsia remain obscure. The term functional dyspepsia was popularized by the famed Walter Alvarez at the Mayo Clinic early last century. Prominent Australian gastroenterologists who have contributed to our understanding of functional dyspepsia include Peter Baume, Barry Marshall, Douglas Piper, Nick Talley, John Kellow, and Gerald Holtmann. Specific dyspeptic symptoms have not generally correlated very well with any particular physiologic disturbance, although gastric disaccommodation and duodenal eosinophilia have been linked to early satiety in this condition. Genetic markers have been tentatively identified, and functional dyspepsia can follow bacterial gastroenteritis. No objective diagnostic tools for functional dyspepsia are currently agreed upon, although meal induction of symptoms appears reproducible and may have diagnostic utility. The symptomatic criteria for functional dyspepsia (Rome III criteria) are based on expert consensus and the exclusion of organic causes. Various therapeutic modalities for functional dyspepsia have been explored; however, empirical approaches are still employed for the treatment of functional dyspepsia. Better approaches for functional dyspepsia are likely to follow an improved understanding of the underlying pathophysiological abnormalities.

Quality of reporting in randomized trials published in high-quality surgical journals

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in surgery can provide valuable evidence of the efficacy of interventions if they are well-designed, appropriately executed, and adequately reported. Adequate reporting of methodology in surgical RCTs is known to be poor, and adverse-event reporting in surgical research is inconsistent. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is a framework to help authors report their findings in a transparent manner. Extensions to the CONSORT statement have been published recently to address deficiencies in adverse-event reporting and in reporting of specific criteria related to nonpharmacologic treatments. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of reporting of trial methodology and adverse events in a sample of general surgical RCTs published in high-quality surgical journals using the criteria specified in the CONSORT statements.

STUDY DESIGN

We used impact factor to identify the top three ranked surgical journals in 2004. We then obtained information on all RCTs published in these journals in the 2005 calendar year. We assessed quality of reporting using Jadad score, compared the quality of RCTs from CONSORT-endorsing journals with nonendorsers, and assessed the number of RCTs adequately reporting key generic methodologic, adverse-event-related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria.

RESULTS

Of 42 RCTs analyzed, only 40% (17 of 42) had a Jadad score > or = 3. There was no significant difference in the number of high-quality RCTs published in CONSORT-endorsing journals compared with nonendorsers (p = 0.3). The median percentage of RCTs adequately reporting generic methodologic, adverse-event-related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria was 32.5%, 17%, and 36.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality of reporting of generic methodologic, adverse-event-related, and specific nonpharmacologic criteria in surgical RCTs is poor. Increased attention to quality of reporting of surgical RCTs is required if studies are to meet published criteria.

Systematic reviews: the good, the bad, and the ugly

Systematic reviews systematically evaluate and summarize current knowledge and have many advantages over narrative reviews. Meta-analyses provide a more reliable and enhanced precision of effect estimate than do individual studies. Systematic reviews are invaluable for defining the methods used in subsequent studies, but, as retrospective research projects, they are subject to bias. Rigorous research methods are essential, and the quality depends on the extent to which scientific review methods are used. Systematic reviews can be misleading, unhelpful, or even harmful when data are inappropriately handled; meta-analyses can be misused when the difference between a patient seen in the clinic and those included in the meta-analysis is not considered. Furthermore, systematic reviews cannot answer all clinically relevant questions, and their conclusions may be difficult to incorporate into practice. They should be reviewed on an ongoing basis. As clinicians, we need proper methodological training to perform good systematic reviews and must ask the appropriate questions before we can properly interpret such a review and apply its conclusions to our patients. This paper aims to assist in the reading of a systematic review.

Searching for unpublished trials in Cochrane reviews may not be worth the effort

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of searching for unpublished data by exploring the extent to which Cochrane reviews include unpublished data and by evaluating the quality of unpublished trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We screened all 2,462 completed Cochrane reviews published since 2000 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Issue 3, 2006. In a random sample (n=61) of 292 reviews, including unpublished trials, we studied all 116 references.

RESULTS

Unpublished trials make up 8.8% of all included trials in our sample. Thirty-eight percent of the "unpublished" trials have in fact been published. Allocation concealment was "unclear" or not adequate in 54.3% and 61.3% reported blinding. In 47.2% reported withdrawal rates were >20%. Trials that were eventually published had larger mean population sizes (P-value, 0.02). Of the reported sponsors, 87.3% were drug companies. Methodological quality and publication bias are mentioned in half of the reviews and explored in a third. Quality ratings did not have consequences for pooling, because 82.8% was included in the forest plots.

CONCLUSIONS

A minority of Cochrane reviews include "unpublished trials" and many of these are eventually published. Truly unpublished studies have poor or unclear methodological quality. Therefore, it may be better to invest in regular updating of reviews, rather than in extensive searching for unpublished data.

Does the evidence show that prokinetic agents are effective in healing esophagitis and improving symptoms of GERD?

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common in affluent societies, and its prevalence is also on the rise in developing regions such as Southeast Asia.1 When heartburn and regurgitation are the dominant symptoms, a diagnosis of GERD can be made. Manzotti and colleagues report in Open Medicine the findings of a systematic review in which they evaluate the use of prokinetic agents in the treatment of reflux esophagitis.

Treatment of functional dyspepsia with serotonin agonists: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is often treated with serotonin agonists; however, the efficacy of such agents has recently been questioned. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing serotonin agonists with other types of prokinetics in patients with FD.

METHODS

Included studies were RCTs that compared serotonin agonists, including cisapride and mosapride, with dopamine antagonists, including metoclopramide and domperidone, and an opiate agonist, trimebutine, in patients with FD. Studies were identified by searching the Medline database (January 1951 - January 2005) and Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2004), and by manual searches. The difference in the probability of patients' responses between the serotonin agonists and control agents was used as a summary statistic for the treatment effect. Meta-regression analysis was used to detect sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Five studies were identified. In total, 467 subjects were assigned to a serotonin agonist arm, and 322 subjects were assigned to a control arm. In the overall analysis, the summary statistic was 0.019 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.055 to 0.093; P = 0.612), indicating that the patients' responses to serotonin agonists were similar to those to control agents. However, in the stratified meta-analysis of cisapride and mosapride, mosapride had a 6.7% greater probability of producing a response compared with control agents (summary statistic: 0.067; 95% CI: 0.010-0.124; P = 0.021), whereas no significant effect was observed with cisapride.

CONCLUSION

The data suggest that mosapride may be more effective than cisapride for the treatment of FD. Although FD is a chronic condition, efficacy was assessed over short periods in the studies used for the present meta-analysis. Long-term RCTs are needed to confirm the effect.

"Cervia II Working Group Report 2006": guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection in Italy

Proper management of Helicobacter pylori infection in clinical practice--when supported by evidence-based data--is expected to produce substantial cost-efficacy advantages. This consideration has prompted the Cervia Working Group to organise a meeting of experts to update the National Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of H. pylori infection in Italy. Recommendations in the new European Guidelines were considered in the National setting, here in the light of factors such as the incidence of gastric cancer and gastric lymphoma, the accessibility to different diagnostic tools, the prevalence of bacterial resistance against antibiotics, and the availability of different drugs. The main revisions in respect to the previous guidelines include H. pylori eradication in non-ulcer dyspepsia patients and in non-steroidal, anti-inflammatory drug users, as well as in patients with idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura and iron deficiency anaemia. The stool antigen test is now accepted as a valid test for confirmation of H. pylori eradication following therapy. New therapeutic approaches have been recommended for both first- (sequential therapy) and second-line (levofloxacin-based) treatment in our country.

Is there a benefit from intensified medical and psychological interventions in patients with functional dyspepsia not responding to conventional therapy?

AIM

In a prospective randomized, controlled trial, to compare the long-term outcome of intensive medical therapy (with or without cognitive-behavioural or muscle relaxation therapy) vs. standard medical therapy in patients with refractory functional dyspepsia (FD), referred to a tertiary referral medical center.

METHODS

A total of 100 consecutive FD patients were allocated to a standardized symptom-oriented 4 month therapy (SMT, n = 24), intensive medical therapy (IMT, medical therapy with testing-for and targeting-of abnormalities of motor-and-sensory function, n = 28) or IMT plus psychological interventions (either progressive-muscle relaxation (IMT-MR, n = 20) or cognitive-behavioural therapy (IMT-CBT, n = 28). The symptom intensity (SI) and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) after 12 months were prespecified primary outcome parameters.

RESULTS

After 12 months, significantly greater improvement of SI occurred in patients with IMT-all (with or without psychological interventions) compared with SMT (P < 0.025 vs. IMT-all). IMT, IMT-MR and IMT-CBT alone also resulted in significantly better improvement of the primary outcome parameters (P all < 0.025 vs. SMT). HRQoL significantly improved in all groups with intensive medical therapy but not standard medical therapy. Differences between intensive medical therapy-all and standard medical therapy were not significant. Concomitant anxiety and depression was improved significantly by IMT-CBT (vs. SMT) but not other treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

In FD patients with refractory symptoms, intensified medical management involving function testing and psychological intervention yields superior long-term-outcomes. Additional CBT may be effective for the control of concomitant anxiety and depression.

Proton pump inhibitors: effective first-line treatment for management of dyspepsia

The aim of this study was to evaluate the reasons for trial exclusion among dyspeptic patients and estimate the proportion that may have benefited from proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. Stringent inclusion criteria for enrollment in two multicenter functional dyspepsia trials included dyspepsia (predominant persistent/recurrent upper abdominal discomfort [UAD] during the prior 3 months) of at least moderate intensity during > or =30% of days during the prior 2 to 3 weeks. Exclusion criteria were mild/infrequent UAD; heartburn and UAD of equal frequency; predominant heartburn with UAD; endoscopic evidence of erosive esophagitis or Barrett's or gastric and/or duodenal erosions (>5) or ulcers; irritable bowel syndrome (IBS); other gastrointestinal diagnoses; or other "non-categorized" disorders. Of 2,588 screened patients, 1,667 were excluded. Excluded patients by category had mild/infrequent UAD (12.5%, n=324), heartburn and UAD of equal frequency (1.1%, n=29), predominant heartburn with UAD (11.6%, n=300), endoscopic evidence of erosive esophagitis or Barrett's (6.2%, n=160), gastric and/or duodenal erosions (1.4%, n=36), gastric and/or duodenal ulcers (2.0%, n=53), IBS (7%, n=180), "other" gastrointestinal diagnoses (2.8%, n=73), or other "non-categorized" disorders (19.8%, n=512). Fifty-four percent of patients (902/1,667) had symptoms/diagnoses that would be expected to improve with PPI therapy. Individuals with IBS, "other," or "non-categorized" disorders were considered to have symptoms unlikely to respond to PPI treatment. Empiric PPI treatment would be expected to provide symptom relief to the majority of dyspepsia sufferer who present in clinical practice. PPIs represent the best currently available therapy for acid-related disorders and should be considered the first-line management approach in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia.

Management of functional somatic syndromes

Although functional somatic syndromes (FSS) show substantial overlap, treatment research is mostly confined to single syndromes, with a lack of valid and generally accepted diagnostic criteria across medical specialties. Here, we review management for the full variety of FSS, drawn from systematic reviews and meta-analyses since 2001, and give recommendations for a stepped care approach that differentiates between uncomplicated and complicated FSS. Non-pharmacological treatments involving active participation of patients, such as exercise and psychotherapy, seem to be more effective than those that involve passive physical measures, including injections and operations. Pharmacological agents with CNS action seem to be more consistently effective than drugs aiming at restoration of peripheral physiological dysfunction. A balance between biomedical, organ-oriented, and cognitive interpersonal approaches is most appropriate at this truly psychosomatic interface. In view of the iatrogenic component in the maintenance of FSS, doctor-centred interventions and close observation of the doctor-patient relationship are of particular importance.

Meta-analysis of the effects of prokinetic agents in patients with functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is often treated with prokinetic agents; however, the efficacy of prokinetic agents in patients with FD has been questioned recently. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of the effects of prokinetic agents in patients with FD.

METHODS

Prokinetic agents, including metoclopramide, domperidone, trimebutine, cisapride, itopride and mosapride, used for treatment of FD between 1951 and 2005 were identified. Twenty-seven studies were selected. Difference in the probability of response between the interventional drug and placebo was used as a summary statistic for the treatment effect. Meta-regression analysis was used to detect sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

In total, 1844 subjects were assigned to an experimental arm, and 1591 subjects were assigned to a placebo arm. Publication bias was ruled out by funnel plot and statistical testing (P = 0.975). In the overall analysis, the summary statistic was 0.295 (95% confidence interval: 0.208-0.382, P < 0.001), indicating that the interventional drug has 30% excess probability of producing a response compared with placebo. The most significant source of heterogeneity was the year of publication (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The data clearly indicate that prokinetic agents are significantly more effective than placebo in the treatment of FD. Although FD is a chronic condition, efficacy was assessed over short periods. Long-term randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the effect.

Effects of proton-pump inhibitors on functional dyspepsia: a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The aim of this study was to assess systematically the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in the treatment of functional dyspepsia compared with placebo and to determine if any difference in the response exists between symptom subgroups of functional dyspepsia.

METHODS

A literature search was performed through September 2005 in PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases to include randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of PPIs for the treatment of functional dyspepsia. Relative risk (RR) and relative risk reduction (RRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated under a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seven studies with a total of 3725 patients were identified. PPIs were found to be more effective than placebo for reducing symptoms in patients with functional dyspepsia (RRR, 10.3%; 95% CI, 2.7%-17.3%). The estimated number needed to treat is 14.6 (95% CI, 8.7-57.1). When stratified analyses were performed, a significant difference in the efficacy was observed only in patients with ulcer-like (RRR, 12.8%; 95% CI, 7.2%-18.1%) and reflux-like dyspepsia (RRR, 19.7%; 95% CI, 1.8%-34.3%), but not in those with dysmotility-like (RRR, 5.1%; 95% CI, -10.9% to 18.7%) and unspecified dyspepsia (RRR, -8.0%; 95% CI, -23.7% to 5.6%). The effect of H pylori on the efficacy of PPIs remains unclear. Significant heterogeneity among studies was found for the overall analysis, dysmotility-like dyspepsia, H pylori-negative subgroup, and different dose subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

PPIs are more effective than placebo for the management of patients with ulcer-like and reflux-like functional dyspepsia.

Effective regimens for the treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection

Successful Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy remains a challenge in medical practice. Currently, a proton pump inhibitor-based triple therapy containing clarithromycin, amoxicillin or nitroimidazole for 7 days is the recommended first-line treatment approach with an expected eradication success rate of approximately 80%. As a second-line treatment option in the case of failure, a ranitidine bismuth citrate-based quadruple therapy is currently recommended curing another 80% of patients, leaving a subset of patients with persistent H. pylori infection. For these patients, promising rescue options have been evaluated including regimens that contain rifabutin, quinolones, furazolidone or high-dose amoxicillin. The role of susceptibility testing is still under discussion. It is not generally recommended prior to first-line treatment but guidelines propose a role for culture and antibiotic sensitivity testing after failure of the second attempt. Meanwhile, data on the geographic distribution of resistance pattern are available and may guide therapeutic decisions with regard to the combination of antibiotics chosen for the individual patients aiming at 100% cure rate in each individual patient.

Pharmacological interventions for non-ulcer dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

The commonest cause of upper gastrointestinal symptoms is non-ulcer dyspepsia (NUD) and yet the pathophysiology of this condition has been poorly characterised and the optimum treatment is uncertain. It is estimated that pound450 million is spent on dyspepsia drugs in the UK each year.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to determine the effectiveness of six classes of drugs (antacids, histamine H(2) antagonists, proton pump inhibitors, prokinetics, mucosal protecting agents and antimuscarinics) in the improvement of either the individual or global dyspepsia symptom scores and also quality of life scores patients with non-ulcer dyspepsia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2006), EMBASE (1988 to January 2006), CINAHL (1982 to January 2006), SIGLE, and reference lists of articles. We also contacted experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies. Trials were located through electronic searches of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCTR), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and SIGLE, using appropriate subject headings and text words, searching bibliographies of retrieved articles, and through contacts with experts in the fields of dyspepsia and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing drugs of any of the six groups with each other or with placebo for non-ulcer dyspepsia (NUD).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility, trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 73 trials: prokinetics (19 trials with dichotomous outcomes evaluating 3178 participants; relative risk reduction (RRR) 33%; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 18% to 45%), H(2)RAs (12 trials evaluating 2,183 participants; RRR 23%; 95% CI 8% to 35%) and PPIs (10 trials evaluating 3,347 participants; RRR 13%; 95% CI 4% to 20%) were significantly more effective than placebo. Bismuth salts (six trials evaluating 311 participants; RRR 40%; 95% CI -3 to 65%) were superior to placebo but this was of marginal statistical significance. Antacids (one trial evaluating 109 participants; RRR -2%; 95% CI -36% to 24%) and sucralfate (two trials evaluating 246 participants; RRR 29%; 95% CI -40% to 64%) were not statistically significantly superior to placebo. A funnel plot suggested that the prokinetic results could be due to publication bias or other small study effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that anti-secretory therapy may be effective in NUD. The trials evaluating prokinetic therapy are difficult to interpret as the meta-analysis result could have been due to publication bias. The effect of these drugs is likely to be small and many patients will need to take them on a long-term basis so economic analyses would be helpful and ideally the therapies assessed need to be inexpensive and well tolerated.

Esomeprazole 40 mg once a day in patients with functional dyspepsia: the randomized, placebo-controlled "ENTER" trial

OBJECTIVE

The etiologies of functional dyspepsia (FD) are unclear, but in some studies, treatment with a proton pump inhibitor has been beneficial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of esomeprazole 40 mg once a day compared to placebo in achieving symptom relief in primary care patients with FD.

METHODS

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial in adult FD patients, who had at least moderate severity of symptoms, defined as a score of > or =4 on a 7-point Global Overall Symptom (GOS) scale. Patients were excluded if they had predominant symptoms of heartburn or regurgitation; after a normal baseline endoscopy, patients were randomized to esomeprazole 40 mg once daily or placebo for 8 wk. The primary outcome measure was symptom relief (GOS < or =2) at 8 wk.

RESULTS

Of the 502 enrolled patients, 224 were randomized. The main reasons for exclusion were abnormal endoscopic findings, especially esophagitis. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the esomeprazole group achieved symptom relief at 4 but not at 8 wk compared to placebo: 4 wk esomeprazole 50.5% versus placebo 32.2%, p= 0.009; 8 wk esomeprazole 55.1% versus placebo 46.1%, p= 0.16. A similar relationship at 4 and 8 wk was seen for symptom resolution (GOS = 1) and improvement (DeltaGOS > or =2).

CONCLUSION

For the primary outcome measure of symptom relief at 8 wk, there was no statistically significant difference between esomeprazole 40 mg once a day and placebo. However, at 4 wk, esomeprazole was significantly more effective than placebo for symptom relief. The difference in therapeutic gain between 4 and 8 wk was largely due to a higher placebo response rate at 8 wk.

Review article: current and emerging therapies for functional dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia represents a heterogeneous group of gastrointestinal disorders marked by the presence of upper abdominal pain or discomfort. Although its precise definition has evolved over the last several decades, this disorder remains shrouded in controversy. The symptoms of functional dyspepsia may overlap with those of other functional bowel disorders including irritable bowel syndrome and non-erosive reflux disease. There may be coexistent psychological distress or disease complicating its presentation and response to therapy. Given the prevalence and chronicity of functional dyspepsia, it remains a great burden to society. Suspected physiological mechanisms underlying functional dyspepsia include altered motility, altered visceral sensation, inflammation, nervous system dysregulation and psychological distress. Yet the exact pathophysiological mechanisms that cause symptoms in an individual patient remain difficult to delineate. Numerous treatment modalities have been employed including dietary modifications, pharmacological agents directed at various targets within the gastrointestinal tract and central nervous system, psychological therapies and more recently, complementary and alternative treatments. Unfortunately, to date, all of these therapies have yielded only marginal results. A variety of emerging therapies are being developed for functional dyspepsia. Most of these therapies are intended to normalize pain perception and gastrointestinal motor and reflex function in this group of patients.

Meta-analysis of prophylactic antibiotic use in acute necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Death from infected necrosis in acute pancreatitis is common and prevention has focused on prophylactic antibiotics. This study assesses whether intravenous prophylactic antibiotic use reduces infected necrosis and death in acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was carried out. Medline, Web of Science, the Cochrane controlled trials register and international conference proceedings were searched, with a citation review of relevant primary and review articles.

RESULTS

Six of 328 studies assessed were included in data extraction. Primary outcome measures were infected necrosis and death. Secondary outcome measures were non-pancreatic infections, surgical intervention and length of hospital stay. Prophylactic antibiotic use was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in infected necrosis (relative risk (RR) 0.77 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.54 to 1.12); P = 0.173), mortality (RR 0.78 (95 per cent c.i. 0.44 to 1.39); P = 0.404), non-pancreatic infections (RR 0.71 (95 per cent c.i. 0.32 to 1.58); P = 0.402) and surgical intervention (RR 0.78 (95 per cent c.i. 0.55 to 1.11); P = 0.167). It was, however, associated with a statistically significant reduction in hospital stay (P = 0.040).

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic antibiotics do not prevent infected necrosis or death in acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

Should the presence of polymorphisms of CYP2C19 enzymes influence the choice of the proton pump inhibitor for treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection?

There are variations in the CYP2C19 genotypes, that are important for the metabolism of PPIs. Patients who are heterozygotes for the mutation, but especially homozygotes, have a much slower metabolism, which will result in more profound acid suppression. Studies have been published, that suggest that the success rate of anti-Helicobacter therapy is in part related to the CYP2C19 genotype of the patient. However, it is important to keep in mind that most studies that have evaluated this have been carried out in Asia, in particular in Japan, where the prevalence of poor metabolizers (PM) is much higher than, for example, in Caucasians. The systematic review published in this issue suggests that particularly for omeprazole in combination with amoxicillin or amoxicillin and clarithromycin the success rate is much lower when compared to other proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). However, there was marked heterogeneity when the results were pooled in formal meta-analysis. Study quality was suboptimal and other factors such as resistance to antibiotics may explain the observed differences in success rates. More clinical trial data are needed before we can accept the conclusions of this meta-analysis.

Helicobacter pylori eradication with either 7-day or 10-day triple therapies, and with a 10-day sequential regimen

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori eradication rates achieved by standard seven-day triple therapies are decreasing in several countries, while a novel 10-day sequential regimen has achieved a very high success rate. A longer 10-day triple therapy, similar to the sequential regimen, was tested to see whether it could achieve a better infection cure rate.

METHODS

Patients with nonulcer dyspepsia and H pylori infection were randomly assigned to one of the following three therapies: esomeprazole 20 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg and amoxycillin 1 g for seven days or 10 days, or a 10-day sequential regimen including esomeprazole 20 mg plus amoxycillin 1 g for five days and esomeprazole 20 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg and tinidazole 500 mg for the remaining five days. All drugs were given twice daily. H pylori eradication was checked four to six weeks after treatment by using a 13C-urea breath test.

RESULTS

Overall, 213 patients were enrolled. H pylori eradication was achieved in 75.7% and 77.9%, in 81.7% and 84.1%, and in 94.4% and 97.1% of patients following seven-day or 10-day triple therapy and the 10-day sequential regimen, at intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses, respectively. The eradication rate following the sequential regimen was higher than either seven-day (P=0.002) or 10-day triple therapy (P=0.02), while no significant difference emerged between the latter two regimens (P=0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

The 10-day sequential regimen was significantly more effective than both triple regimens, while 10-day triple therapy failed to significantly increase the H pylori eradication rate achieved by the standard seven-day regimen.

Therapeutic strategies for functional dyspepsia and the introduction of the Rome III classification

Although placebo response rates in clinical trials for functional dyspepsia (FD) are more than 30%, a recent meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that antisecretory drugs were more or less superior to placebos. On the other hand, large-scale RCTs on the efficacy of treatment with prokinetics on FD are still needed. Indications for antibiotic eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori-positive FD are still controversial, but there seems to be a small but significant therapeutic gain achieved with H. pylori eradication. Since preprandial and postprandial symptomatic disturbances are very important targets for FD treatment, ghrelin, a novel appetite-promoting gastrointestinal peptide that also promotes gastric motility or basal acid secretion can be expected to be a therapeutic target. In the recently published Rome III classification, FD is redefined for patients with symptoms thought to originate from the gastroduodenal region, specifically epigastric pain or burning, postprandial fullness, or early satiation, and it is divided into the subcategories postprandial distress syndrome and epigastric pain syndrome. These new criteria are of value in clinical practice, for epidemiological, pathophysiological, and clinical research, and for the development of new therapeutic strategies.

Drug treatment of functional dyspepsia

Symptomatic improvement of patients with functional dyspepsia after drug therapy is often incomplete and obtained in not more than 60% of patients. This is likely because functional dyspepsia is a heterogeneous disease. Although great advance has been achieved with the consensus definitions of the Rome I and II criteria, there are still some aspects about the definition of functional dyspepsia that require clarification. The Rome criteria explicitly recognise that epigastric pain or discomfort must be the predominant complaint in patients labelled as suffering from functional dyspepsia. However, this strict definition can create problems in the daily primary care clinical practice, where the patient with functional dyspepsia presents with multiple symptoms. Before starting drug therapy it is recommended to provide the patient with an explanation of the disease process and reassurance. A thorough physical examination and judicious use of laboratory data and endoscopy are also indicated. In general, the approach to treat patients with functional dyspepsia based on their main symptom is practical and effective. Generally, patients should be treated with acid suppressive therapy using proton-pump inhibitors if the predominant symptoms are epigastric pain or gastroesophageal reflux symptoms. Although the role of Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) in functional dyspepsia continues to be a matter of debate, recent data indicate that there is modest but clear benefit of eradication of H pylori in patients with functional dyspepsia. In addition, H pylori is a gastric carcinogen and if found it should be eliminated. Although there are no specific diets for patients with FD, it may be helpful to guide the patients on healthy exercise and eating habits.

Pathogenesis and therapy for idiopathic dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders. This review summarizes recent progress in our understanding of the pathogenesis and therapy for FD. Although distinction among FD, irritable bowel syndrome, and reflux disease is difficult in population-based studies, separate entities can be recognized in patients who seek medical attention. The pathogenesis of FD remains unclear, but recent studies have demonstrated a role for acute gastrointestinal infection in triggering FD and in genetic polymorphisms of G-proteins in predisposing to FD. The role of abnormalities in gastric motor function, visceral hypersensitivity, and psychosocial factors in the pathophysiology of dyspeptic symptoms has been the topic of multiple studies. Treatment options for FD remain limited. Recent studies have focused on acid-suppressive drugs and on novel prokinetics. Progress in our understanding of the pathogenesis and pathophysiology of FD may lead to new or improved treatment modalities. Areas of major advances are the role of infection and genetic predisposition and studies on the role of abnormalities in gastric motility and sensitivity.

Functional dyspepsia pathogenesis and therapeutic options--implications for management

Functional dyspepsia is far more common than dyspepsia due to organic disease, both in the community and general practice. Proposed aetiopathogenic factors include gastric acid, Helicobacter pylori infection, delayed emptying, hypersensitivity or impaired accommodation of the stomach, dysfunction of the duodenum or brain-gut axis, psychosocial morbidity and post-infective mucosal damage. More effective therapy will depend on the development of drugs targeted at these putative pathophysiological mechanisms. On current evidence tricyclic antidepressants appear to be more effective than either acid suppressants or H. pylori eradication.