Herbal medicines in functional dyspepsia-Untapped opportunities not without risks.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary treatments for functional dyspepsia have limitations. Herbal medicine has been suggested as adjunctive treatment. With growing scientific recognition and public interests, an in-depth review of this is timely. AIMS/PURPOSE: To evaluate the therapeutic potential and problems that may be associated with the adoption of herbal medicines in functional dyspepsia. METHODS: We reviewed the treatment landscape of functional dyspepsia and assessed the scientific community's interest in herbal medicine. Preclinical pharmacological and clinical trial data were reviewed for several herbal medicines available in the market. Challenges associated with adoption of herbal medicine in mainstream medicine were critically evaluated. RESULTS: We found that herbal medicines frequently comprise a combination of herbs with multiple reported pharmacological effects on gastrointestinal motility and secretory functions, as well as cytoprotective and psychotropic properties. We identified a number of commercially available herbal products that have undergone rigorous clinical trials, involving large numbers of well-defined subjects, reporting both efficacy and safety for functional dyspepsia. Persisting concerns include lack of rigorous assessments for majority of products, toxicity, consistency of ingredients, dose standardizations, and quality control. We provide a quality framework for its evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: We commend herbal medicine as a viable future option in managing functional dyspepsia. An attractive appeal of herbal medicine is the prospect to simultaneously target multiple pathophysiological mechanisms. Wider adoption and acceptance of herbal medicines in treatment algorithms of functional dyspepsia will require the application of the scientific rigor expected of chemical therapies, to all stages of their development and evaluation.

Herbal medicine in the treatment of functional gastrointestinal disorders: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The efficacy of herbal medicines (HMs) for functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) including irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), functional dyspepsia (FD) and functional constipation (FC) is controversial. A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to determine their effectiveness for FGIDs. METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases till July 2019 with English language restriction: The Cochrane Library, EMBASE and PUBMED. Randomized double-blind controlled trials of HMs compared with placebo or conventional pharmacological drugs for adult FGIDs patients were included. RESULTS: In total, 49 trials involving 7396 participants with FGIDs were included. The risk of bias was low in 9, unclear in 36, and high in 4 trials. More than 33 different herbal formulae were tested. HMs demonstrated statistically significant benefits for symptom improvement compared with placebo in 46 trials (RR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.48-1.88). When compared with conventional pharmacological therapy in 5 trials, HMs were found to be non-inferior (RR = 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.18). The number of trials with regards to FD, IBS and FC were 19, 23 and 7 respectively. Subgroup analysis found that HMs were better than placebo in alleviating symptoms for FD (RR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.32-1.69), IBS (RR = 1.62, 95% CI 1.32-1.97) and FC (RR = 3.83, 95% CI 2.26-6.50). HMs tended to have more patients with adverse events than placebo, but similar to conventional pharmacological drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide a positive signal for HMs as a potentially well-tolerated and effective treatment for FGIDs, deserving further examination in high-quality trials.

Searching for a definition for pharmacologically refractory constipation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Surgery and other non-pharmacological treatments such as sacral nerve stimulation are used for the treatment of difficult-to-treat chronic constipation. Novel pharmacological therapeutic agents are also being introduced. To evaluate the efficacy of these treatments, it is imperative to have a consistent definition of pharmacologically refractory constipation. A systematic review of studies on refractory, difficult-to-treat or surgically treated constipation was carried out to determine the criteria that various authors used to define this group of patients. METHODS: A systematic review was performed for literature published from June 2005 to June 2015 using PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases, as well as manual searches. Studies on patients with refractory or intractable constipation were extracted. Criteria used for defining refractory constipation, as well as pharmacological agents tried including dosage, frequency, and duration, were reviewed. RESULTS: Sixty-one studies were included in this review. Forty-eight involved surgical treatment of constipation, while 13 examined non-surgical therapies for refractory constipation. There is no generally accepted definition of refractory constipation. Authors consider constipation to be refractory when response to management is suboptimal, but there is no consensus on the choice of drug, order of usage, and dosage or treatment duration. Prior medical therapy was not mentioned at all in five studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is need for a detailed definition of pharmacologically refractory constipation before submitting patients to invasive treatments and to evaluate new pharmacological agents.