Functional dyspepsia versus other functional gastrointestinal disorders: a practical approach in Belgian general practices

Atypical symptoms in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease

Background/Aims

Atypical symptoms are common in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and erosive reflux disease (ERD) exhibit different clinical characteristics and responses to acid suppression treatment. We aimed to compare atypical characteristics in patients with NERD and ERD. We also investigated the presence of histological esophagitis in patients with NERD and ERD.

Methods

Eligible patients completed a questionnaire regarding reflux symptoms and concomitant atypical symptoms. Endoscopic biopsies with histological examination were performed.

Results

Of the 210 patients with GERD, 90 patients with ERD and 120 patients with NERD were studied. ERD patients were characterized by higher prevalence of hiatal hernia (P = 0.001) and smoking (P = 0.047). The prevalence of GERD was greater in the age group between 41 and 60 years regardless of endoscopic finding. There was no difference in the prevalence of atypical symptoms or histological esophagitis between NERD and ERD. In all subjects, heartburn was associated with dysphagia (r = 0.16, P = 0.01), dyspepsia (r = 0.22, P = 0.008) and hiccup (r = 0.19, P = 0.003), whereas acid regurgitation was associated with dyspepsia (r = 0.21, P = 0.014), belching (r = 0.15, P = 0.018) and hiccup (r = 0.19, P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Atypical symptoms did not correlate with the presence of histological esophagitis. Atypical symptoms were equally prevalent in patients with NERD and ERD. The existence of atypical symptoms appears to be associated with the presence of typical reflux symptoms irrespective of endoscopic and histological reflux esophagitis.

Eructophilia in bulimia nervosa: a clinical feature

This report offers the first detailed description of repetitive eructation (belching) in a patient with bulimia nervosa. The case was a man in his 30's with bulimia nervosa characterized by daily bingeing and purging behavior. Detailed assessment revealed repetitive eructation which was construed as a learned behavior precipitated and maintained by aerophagia (air swallowing) secondary to regular binge-eating. Eructation was associated with a strong sense of "relief" that shared a common phenomenology with other purging behaviors. Repetitive eructation was addressed as part of outpatient treatment using a cognitive-therapy approach. Eructation became less frequent during outpatient treatment but the patient disengaged after six sessions. We define a new term "eructophilia" where repetitive eructation takes on an ego-syntonic, self-contained, and autonomous quality which serves as a reinforcing stimulus in itself. Issues of phenomenology and motivating factors are further discussed.

Repetitive eructation (belching) in children: is it pathological?

Eructation (belching) is a common symptom encountered in clinical practice. It has a similar mechanism as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GORD), which is transient lower oesophageal relaxation and is generally assumed to be a manifestation of GORD. Repetitive eructation can be distressing and its management can be difficult and challenging. This report highlights this problem in two adolescent children with a comprehensive review and discussion of its etio-pathogenesis.

Pharmacoeconomic Impact of Low-Dose Macrogol 3350 plus Electrolytes Compared with Lactulose in the Management of Chronic Idiopathic Constipation among Ambulant Patients in Belgium

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the economic impact of using low-dose macrogol 3350 plus electrolytes (macrogol 3350; Movicol((R))) compared with lactulose in the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation among ambulant patients in Belgium, from the perspectives of the Sick Fund and patients. The analysis considered separately the economic impact of (a) a specialist and (b) a general practitioner (GP) initiating treatment.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This was a modelling study performed from the perspective of Belgium's Sick Fund and patients.

METHODS

Estimates of healthcare resource utilisation in a previously reported UK model depicting the management of chronic idiopathic constipation with either macrogol 3350 and lactulose over 3 months were replaced with Belgian estimates derived from a panel of 11 gastroenterologists and 11 GPs. The model was used to estimate the expected 3-monthly Sick Fund cost and direct cost to patients of using either laxative to manage chronic idiopathic constipation in Belgium.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS

According to our model, 53% and 24% of patients are expected to be successfully treated with macrogol 3350 and lactulose, respectively. Additionally, using macrogol 3350 instead of lactulose is expected to reduce the 3-monthly Sick Fund cost in approximately 55% of patients and afford a cost-effective treatment in the remaining patients. Furthermore, the 3-monthly Sick Fund cost of managing chronic idiopathic constipation among ambulant patients is expected to be reduced by approximately 50% if patients were initially treated by a GP instead of a specialist. In Belgium, laxatives are paid for by patients. Despite the difference in their acquisition cost, treating chronic idiopathic constipation with either macrogol 3350 or lactulose was found to be cost neutral from a patient's perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

The true cost of managing chronic idiopathic constipation is impacted on by a broad range of resources and not only laxative acquisition costs. This study indicated that managing ambulant patients with chronic idiopathic constipation with macrogol 3350 instead of lactulose is a cost-effective treatment from the Sick Fund's perspective and cost neutral from a patient's perspective.

Belching: dyspepsia or gastroesophageal reflux disease?

OBJECTIVES

Eructation (belching) is a common symptom seen in clinical practice. Because either belching or heartburn may result from transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations, it has been proposed that belching may be a manifestation of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). In this retrospective study we evaluated the prevalence of belching in dyspepsia and GERD and the relation of belching to acid reflux events documented by pH monitoring.

METHODS

We examined the prevalence, frequency, and severity of belching and other GERD symptoms by use of standardized questionnaires in 180 GERD patients (group A) and 78 dyspeptic controls (group B) referred for evaluation at our institution. GERD was defined as either endoscopic esophagitis (or Barrett's esophagus) or positive DeMeester score (>14.2) on pH monitoring or both. Dyspeptic patients had normal endoscopy and pH studies. We also analyzed the relationship of belching to acid reflux events during the 24-h period of pH studies.

RESULTS

Of 180 GERD patients, 132 (70%) reported belching during pH monitoring, versus 63 of 78 dyspeptic patients (80%) (p = ns). Similarly, 163 of 180 GERD patients (90%) reported heartburn versus 64 of 78 of dyspeptic patients (82%) (p = ns). Review of symptom questionnaires revealed no significant difference in belching severity between groups. However, heartburn and acid regurgitation were significantly more severe among GERD patients. There was a significantly higher correlation of both heartburn and belching with acid events in patients with GERD compared with patients with dyspepsia. In addition, although both belching and heartburn were significantly improved in patients with GERD, belching scores remained unchanged after proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in patients with dyspepsia.

CONCLUSIONS

Belching is as common and as severe in patients with dyspepsia as it is in patients with GERD. Belching and heartburn in GERD patients are more likely correlated with episodes of pathological acid reflux. Because belching cannot be clinically used as a discriminatory symptom, ambulatory pH monitoring should be considered to elucidate the relationship of belching to acid reflux in patients with dyspepsia or GERD.

Review Article: pain versus discomfort--is differentiation clinically useful?

Functional dyspepsia is highly variable in its clinical presentation and multifactorial in its underlying causes. Since many of the symptoms included in the definition of dyspepsia are intuitively suggestive of different pathogenic mechanisms, it has been proposed that patients with functional dyspepsia be divided into distinct dyspepsia sub-groups according to symptom clusters. The goal was to classify patients more homogeneously for research purposes as well as to target treatment. However, recent epidemiological, pathophysiological, and clinical studies indicate that a priori definitions based on the presence/absence of symptoms or clusters of symptoms have no clinical utility due to the considerable overlap between symptoms, as well as the poor correlation between pathogenic factors and responses to treatment. Attention is now focused on identifying predominant symptoms. Recent studies suggest that the analysis of predominant symptoms, demographic features, and overlapping digestive syndromes can help to identify dyspepsia sub-groups with different underlying pathophysiological features and aid in selecting appropriate treatment. The utility of this approach has been demonstrated in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, which can be reliably diagnosed and managed on the basis of the presence and severity of the predominant symptom, heartburn. It is likely that precise symptom definitions and history-taking will be of pivotal importance in management strategies for functional dyspepsia.

Nomenclature of dyspepsia, dyspepsia subgroups and functional dyspepsia: clarifying the concepts

There is international agreement that dyspepsia refers to pain or discomfort centered in the upper abdomen. However, the term 'discomfort' has been variably defined. While other symptoms may often be simultaneously present, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease can usually be clearly distinguished by the presence of predominant heartburn. Dyspepsia is a frequent reason for consultation in primary care and in gastrointestinal practice. With the widespread availability and utilization of endoscopy, it has become evident that a structural (or organic) explanation is found in only a minority of patients presenting with dyspepsia. Operationally, functional dyspepsia is defined as persistent or recurrent dyspepsia for 3 or more months in the absence of a clinically identifiable structural disease causing the symptoms. It has been proposed, based on symptoms, that functional dyspepsia be subdivided into symptom subgroups to promote patient homogeneity. The initially proposed 'clustering' of symptoms into ulcer-like and dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia has proved a dismal failure because of the considerable overlap observed, the lack of stability over time and the failure to identify robust pathophysiological abnormalities or responses to therapy. A subcategorization based upon the most bothersome symptom is theoretically more attractive but needs to be prospectively and rigorously tested.

Meta-analysis of antisecretory and gastrokinetic compounds in functional dyspepsia

In view of therapeutic advances, we carried out meta-analysis of results from 18 randomized, controlled clinical studies to update a previous meta-analysis and to provide an overview of clinical trials involving treatment of functional dyspepsia. The studies were included only if they satisfied inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessed treatment of functional dyspepsia with the antisecretory compounds cimetidine and ranitidine and the gastrokinetic compounds cisapride and domperidone. Outcomes of each of these trials were classified in terms of differences in therapeutic success between active treatment and placebo. For antisecretory treatments, the 95% confidence intervals for the difference in therapeutic success between active treatment and placebo were inconsistent for cimetidine, but analysis of both ranitidine trials gave favorable results. For the gastrokinetic compounds cisapride and domperidone, the differences in success rates were generally higher and more in favor of active treatment than placebo. By combining the results from both antisecretory treatments and comparing them with the combined results for gastrokinetic compounds, we observed that gastrokinetic compounds had a greater difference in success rates than did antisecretory agents. Overall, our meta-analysis shows that antisecretory treatment with cimetidine or ranitidine offers little advantage over placebo, whereas gastrokinetic treatment with cisapride or domperidone is significantly better than placebo for treatment of functional dyspepsia.

Management of dyspepsia in general practice. A critical assessment

The International Gastro Primary Care Group (IGPCG) Upper Gastrointestinal Disease Management Plan is mainly characterised by the proposal that management of patients with upper gastrointestinal syndromes be based on the predominant symptom, rather than on symptom clusters. Although no study has directly tested this hypothesis in general practice, some data indirectly support the proposal. Classification based on the relevance of specific symptoms could identify distinct subgroups of patients with functional dyspepsia with at least partially different features. Data obtained from the literature are discussed and evaluated in relation to the suggested algorithm. Overall, this management plan for patients with dyspepsia seems to be both safe and effective. However, there is a need for prospective studies evaluating its actual validity.

Cisapride. An updated review of its pharmacology and therapeutic efficacy as a prokinetic agent in gastrointestinal motility disorders

Cisapride is an orally administered prokinetic agent which facilitates or restores motility throughout the length of the gastrointestinal tract. It is a substituted piperidinyl benzamide, chemically related to metoclopramide, but unlike metoclopramide, cisapride is largely devoid of central depressant or antidopaminergic effects. In placebo-controlled trials, cisapride improved healing rates and symptoms in both adults and children with reflux oesophagitis. Maintenance therapy with cisapride at half the healing dose is effective in reducing the incidence of relapse. Symptoms are also alleviated in patients with functional dyspepsia, and gastric emptying and symptoms are improved in most patients with gastroparesis, an effect which is sustained during long term administration. However, the efficacy of cisapride in end-stage gastroparesis remains less clear. Cisapride increases stool frequency in patients with chronic constipation, and limited data suggest that the drug may also be beneficial in treating chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction and irritable bowel syndrome. Cisapride demonstrated efficacy comparable with or superior to that of metoclopramide, and was at least as effective as cimetidine and ranitidine in patients with reflux disease. In patients with functional dyspepsia, cisapride has shown at least equal efficacy to domperidone, metoclopramide and ranitidine, and superior efficacy to cimetidine in the small comparative trials conducted to date. Adverse effects in patients receiving cisapride are generally transient and mild, with abdominal cramping, borborygmi, diarrhoea or loose stools most frequently reported. Central nervous system adverse effects are rare. Thus, with its favourable tolerability profile and demonstrated efficacy in a variety of gastrointestinal motility disorders, the position of cisapride as a valuable agent in the management of patients with gastrointestinal motility disorders is strengthening. However, larger well-controlled comparative trials of the drug with other agents are necessary before the relative position of cisapride in therapy can be categorically defined.