RESUMEN
Background: Dyspeptic symptoms are common and mainly due to functional dyspepsia (FD). The Rome IV criteria mandate a normal upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy before diagnosing FD. However, endoscopies are costly, resource-intensive procedures that generate substantial waste. Hence, simpler means of diagnosing FD are desirable. Objectives: To determine what proportion of UGI endoscopies are represented by patients with symptoms compatible with Rome IV FD, and the diagnostic yield in this cohort stratified according to alarm features. Methods: Adult patients attending a UK centre for outpatient UGI endoscopy completed a preprocedure questionnaire on demographics, medical history, alarm features, mood, somatisation and GI symptoms. Alarm features were defined as age ≥55 years, dysphagia, anaemia, unintentional weight loss, UGI bleed or a family history of UGI cancer. Clinically significant endoscopic findings were cancers, Barrett's oesophagus, erosive oesophagitis, peptic ulcers or strictures. Results: Of 387 patients attending for an outpatient non-surveillance diagnostic UGI endoscopy, 221 had symptoms compatible with FD whereas 166 did not. Approximately 80% in both groups had alarm features, with a similar prevalence of clinically significant endoscopic findings at ~10%. UGI endoscopy was normal in a cohort of 9% (n=35) with symptoms compatible with FD and no alarm features, while benign peptic ulcer was noted in two of 29 cases without FD symptoms and no alarm features. Conclusion: 1-in-10 UGI endoscopies are performed in patients with symptoms compatible with FD and no alarm features, in whom there is no diagnostic yield. We recommend such patients receive a positive diagnosis of FD without endoscopy.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Transient loss of consciousness (TLOC) is a common presentation in primary care. Over 90% of these are due to epileptic seizures (ES), syncope, or psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES). Misdiagnosis rates are as high as 30%. METHODS: Systematic review of inter-ictal clinical criteria to aid differential diagnosis of TLOC. We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycInfo databases, as well as relevant grey literature depositories and citations of relevant reviews and guidelines for studies giving sensitivity and specificity of inter-ictal clinical characteristics used to differentiate between causes of TLOC. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion and performed critical appraisal of included articles. We performed a narrative synthesis of included studies. RESULTS: Of 1023 results, 16 papers were included. Two compared syncope, ES, and PNES; all others compared ES and PNES. All were at significant risk of bias in at least one domain. 6 studied patient symptoms, 6 medical and social history, 3 witness reports and 1 examination findings. No individual criterion differentiated between diagnoses with high sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of validated diagnostic criteria to help clinicians assessing patients in primary or emergency care settings to discriminate between common causes of TLOC. Performance may be improved by combining sets of criteria in a clinical decision rule, but no such rule has been validated prospectively against gold-standard diagnostic criteria.
