Dataset Information

Pros and Cons While Looking Through an Asian Window on the Rome IV Criteria for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Pros.

ABSTRACT: A decade after Rome III, in 2016, Rome IV criteria were published. There are major differences between Rome IV and the earlier iteration, some of which are in line with Asian viewpoints. The clinical applicability of the Rome IV criteria of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in Asian perspective is reviewed here. Instead of considering functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) to be largely psychogenic, Rome IV suggested the importance of the gut over brain ("disorders of gut-brain interaction" not "brain-gut interaction"). The word "functional" is underplayed. Multi-dimensional clinical profile attempts to recognize micro-organic nature, like slow colon transit and fecal evacuation disorders in constipation and dietary intolerance including that of lactose and fructose, bile acid malabsorption, non-celiac wheat sensitivity, small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, and gastrointestinal infection in diarrhea. Overlap between different FGIDs has been recognized as Rome IV suggests these to be a spectrum rather than discrete disorders. Bloating, common in Asia, received attention, though less. Sub-typing of IBS may be more clinician-friendly now as the patient-reported stool form may be used than a diary. However, a few issues, peculiar to Asia, need consideration; Rome IV, like Rome III, suggests that Bristol type I-II stool to denote constipation though Asian experts include type III as well. Work-up for physiological factors should be given greater importance. Language issue is important. Bloating, common in IBS, should be listed in the criteria. Threshold values for symptoms in Rome IV criteria are based on Western data. Post-infectious malabsorption (tropical sprue) should be excluded to diagnose post-infectious IBS, particularly in Asia.

SUBMITTER: Ghoshal UC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5503282 | biostudies-other | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA high prevalence of primary bile acid diarrhoea (BAD) has been reported for Rome III defined irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)-diarrhoea and functional diarrhoea. We determined whether this still applies under the contemporaneous Rome IV criteria, given that the latter characterises IBS-diarrhoea as having more frequent abdominal pain compared with previous iterations, whilst no longer recognising abdominal discomfort.MethodsPatients referred for a 75SeHCAT test completed a baseline questionnaire comprising, i) demographic data, ii) risk factors for BAD (inflammatory bowel disease, bowel resection, cholecystectomy, microscopic colitis, celiac disease, abdominal-pelvic radiotherapy), iii) the Rome III and IV bowel disorder questionnaire, and iv) mood and somatisation scores. A diagnosis of BAD constituted a 75SeHCAT of ≤15%, with moderate to severe disease being defined as ≤10% and ≤5%, respectively.FindingsOf 300 patients with complete dataset, 184 had no risk factors for BAD and fulfilled criteria for either IBS-diarrhoea or functional diarrhoea. The prevalence of primary BAD was 38% (n = 70/184), with almost half having moderate (n = 16) to severe (n = 17) disease. Using the Rome III criteria, the prevalence of primary BAD was 36% in IBS-diarrhoea (n = 63/173) and 64% (n = 7/11) in functional diarrhoea; p = 0.11. Using the Rome IV criteria, the prevalence of primary BAD was 38% (n = 53/139) in IBS-diarrhoea and 38% (n = 17/45) in functional diarrhoea; p = 0.97. Patients with primary BAD experienced more frequent loose stools (p = 0.01) and had a higher body mass index (p<0.0001) compared to those without BAD, but otherwise no significant differences were seen in age, gender, mood, somatisation, or abdominal pain. The presence of primary BAD in patients classified as overweight or obese was approximately 40% and 60%, respectively.InterpretationOver a third of patients with Rome IV IBS-diarrhoea or functional diarrhoea have primary BAD, similar to Rome III. We therefore recommend that, in secondary care settings, generic testing for primary BAD should be considered in patients presenting with chronic diarrhoea of presumed functional origin regardless of concomitant abdominal pain. Centres that lack tests for primary BAD, and who empirically treat instead, may consider targeting patients who are overweight or obese.

Project description:Background and objectives: Most individuals with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are diagnosed by primary health care (PHC) physicians. However, a significant percentage of patients remain undiagnosed or misdiagnosed owing to the lack of knowledge or a systematic strategy regarding the use of ROME IV criteria for the diagnosis of IBS. Thus, in this study, we aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practices among primary health care physicians in Jazan Province, Saudi Arabia, regarding ROME IV criteria for the diagnosis of IBS. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a pretested self-administered questionnaire that determines participants’ sociodemographic data and measures knowledge about ROME IV criteria, targeting PHC physicians in Jazan Province, Saudi Arabia. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) v.23. Results: We included 200 participants, and the majority of participants in our study (approximately 78%) were aware of the ROME IV diagnostic criteria for IBS; this awareness was associated with age, nationality, specialty, and classification. The participants’ mean level of knowledge was 4.30 (out of 6). However, knowledge was higher among Saudi and family medicine doctors in this study, as compared to non-Saudi and doctors of other specialties. More than two-thirds of participants who were aware of ROME IV criteria thought that they are sufficient to diagnose IBS; however, only 47.5% of physicians reported using ROME IV frequently in their daily practice. Conclusions: Most of the participants of this study are aware of ROME IV criteria, and better knowledge was noted among Saudi and family medicine physicians. About 70% thought that ROME IV criteria are effective enough to diagnose IBS, and only about half of the participants use ROME IV criteria in their practice. Therefore, due to its high prevalence in the region, further efforts are required to disseminate basic knowledge and improve attitudes and practices related to ROME IV criteria among PHC physicians of all specialties.

Project description:Background & aimsThe existence of postinfection irritable bowel syndrome (PI-IBS) has been substantiated by epidemiology studies conducted in diverse geographic and clinical settings. However, the available evidence has not been well summarized, and there is little guidance for diagnosis and treatment of PI-IBS. The ROME Foundation has produced a working team report to summarize the available evidence on the pathophysiology of PI-IBS and provide guidance for diagnosis and treatment, based on findings reported in the literature and clinical experience.MethodsThe working team conducted an evidence-based review of publication databases for articles describing the clinical features (diagnosis), pathophysiology (intestinal sensorimotor function, microbiota, immune dysregulation, barrier dysfunction, enteroendocrine pathways, and genetics), and animal models of PI-IBS. We used a Delphi-based consensus system to create guidelines for management of PI-IBS and a developed treatment algorithm based on published findings and experiences of team members.ResultsPI-IBS develops in about 10% of patients with infectious enteritis. Risk factors include female sex, younger age, psychological distress during or before acute gastroenteritis, and severity of the acute episode. The pathogenesis of PI-PBS appears to involve changes in the intestinal microbiome as well as epithelial, serotonergic, and immune system factors. However, these mechanisms are incompletely understood. There are no evidence-based, effective pharmacologic strategies for treatment of PI-IBS. We provide a consensus-based treatment algorithm, based on clinical presentation and potential disease mechanisms.ConclusionsBased on a systematic review of the literature and team experience, we summarize the clinical features, pathophysiology (from animal models and human studies), and progression of PI-IBS. Based on these findings, we present an algorithm for diagnosis and treatment of PI-IBS based on team consensus. We also propose areas for future investigation.

Project description:BackgroundIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most frequent and recurrent gastrointestinal diseases. However, up to now, no pharmacological agent has been approved to treat IBS. Emerging evidence showed that inflammation has a vital role in enhancing nervous system sensitivity and perception of abdominal pain in subjects with IBS. Propolis is an herbal substance with a broad spectrum of antioxidants, anti-inflammatory, and prebiotic properties, which might exert beneficial effects to reduce the severity of IBS. The current clinical trial aims to evaluate the efficacy of propolis supplementation on IBS.MethodsThis single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial will be performed to evaluate the effect of propolis supplementation in adult patients with IBS diagnosed with Rome IV criteria. Fifty-two eligible patients will randomly be allocated to receive a propolis tablet (450 mg, containing 100 mg polyphenol compounds) or identical placebo, twice daily for 6 weeks. The primary outcome of the trial is an improvement in IBS severity from baseline to the sixth week of intervention. The secondary outcomes include the change in weight, waist circumference, and IBS quality of life. We will use the paired sample t test or Mann-Whitney U test for the within-group comparison and independent sample t test or Wilcoxon rank-sum and chi-square test or Fisher's exact test for the between-group comparison. Besides, a multivariable-adjusted mean effect will be computed using the ANCOVA test.DiscussionWe hypothesize that propolis supplementation would be useful for treating IBS through its antioxidants, anti-inflammatory, and prebiotic properties. This trial will show the results of propolis supplementation, whether positive or negative, on IBS. If the current trial confirms our hypothesis, propolis supplementation can be a new choice in adjunctive therapy of IBS.Trial registrationIranian Registry of Clinical Trials IRCT20190708044154N1. Registered on 26 December 2019. Updated on 13 February 2020. https://en.irct.ir/trial/40983 SPONSOR: Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.

Dataset Information

Pros and Cons While Looking Through an Asian Window on the Rome IV Criteria for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Pros.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets