Rome III vs Rome IV criteria for irritable bowel syndrome: A comparison of clinical characteristics in a large cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The Rome criteria for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) have been revised and are expected to apply only to the subset of Rome III IBS subjects with abdominal pain as predominant symptom, occurring at least once a week. The aim of this study was to determine the percentage of Rome III IBS subjects that fulfills Rome IV criteria and to evaluate differences between Rome IV-positive and Rome IV-negative subjects. METHODS: Four hundred and four Rome III IBS subjects completed a 14-day end-of-day symptom diary, the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and RAND 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Diary-based surrogate Rome IV criteria were defined as occurrence of abdominal pain at least 1 day each week with a severity of ≥2 (mild; definition 1) or ≥3 (considerable; definition 2). KEY RESULTS: Using surrogate Rome IV criteria, 353 (87.4%, definition 1) and 249 (61.6%, definition 2) subjects were defined as Rome IV positive. These patients were more often female, younger, and recruited from secondary/tertiary care compared with Rome IV-negative subjects. They also presented with higher abdominal pain scores and gastrointestinal (GI) symptom severity on both end-of-day diary and GSRS, higher psychological symptom scores, and lower quality of life compared with Rome IV-negative subjects. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: The Rome IV IBS population likely reflects a subgroup of Rome III IBS patients with more severe GI symptomatology, psychological comorbidities, and lower quality of life. This implies that results from Rome III IBS studies may not be directly comparable to those from Rome IV IBS populations.

Habitual diet and diet quality in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Diet is considered to be a key factor in symptom generation in Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) and patients tend to exclude food products from their diet in pursue of symptom relief, which may impair diet quality. METHODS: We evaluated habitual dietary intake in IBS patients with regard to nutrients and food products using an extensive food frequency questionnaire. One hundred ninety-four IBS patients were compared to 186 healthy controls using multiple logistic regression analysis. An overall diet quality score was calculated for each participant based on the criteria of the Dutch Healthy Diet (DHD) index. KEY RESULTS: A lower DHD-score was found for IBS (mean [SD]: 52.9 [9.6]) vs controls (55.1 [9.2], P=.02). The diet of patients was lower in fibers (21 g vs 25 g per day, P=.002) and fructose (14 g vs 16 g, P=.033), while higher in total fat (37% vs 36% of total energy intake, P=.010) and added sugars (46 g vs 44 g, P=.029). Differences in daily intake of food products included lower consumption of apples (40 g vs 69 g, P<.001), pasta (28 vs 37 g, P=.029) and alcoholic beverages (130 g vs 193 g, P=.024) and higher consumption of processed meat (38 g vs 29 g, P<.001). Some of these findings correlated with gastrointestinal symptoms, showing differences between IBS subtypes. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: Differences in habitual diet were described, showing lower diet quality in IBS patients compared to controls, with increased consumption of fat and lower intake of fibers and fructose. Our data support the importance of personalized and professional nutritional guidance of IBS patients.

Small intestinal permeability is increased in diarrhoea predominant IBS, while alterations in gastroduodenal permeability in all IBS subtypes are largely attributable to confounders.

BACKGROUND: Intestinal permeability has been studied in small groups of IBS patients with contrasting findings. AIMS: To assess intestinal permeability at different sites of the GI tract in different subtypes of well-characterised IBS patients and healthy controls (HC), and to assess potential confounding factors. METHODS: IBS patients and HC underwent a multi-sugar test to assess site-specific intestinal permeability. Sucrose excretion and lactulose/rhamnose ratio in 0-5 h urine indicated gastroduodenal and small intestinal permeability, respectively. Sucralose/erythritol ratio in 0-24 h and 5-24 h urine indicated whole gut and colonic permeability, respectively. Linear regression analysis was used to assess the association between IBS groups and intestinal permeability and to adjust for age, sex, BMI, anxiety or depression, smoking, alcohol intake and use of medication. RESULTS: Ninety-one IBS patients, i.e. 37% IBS-D, 23% IBS-C, 33% IBS-M and 7% IBS-U and 94 HC were enrolled. Urinary sucrose excretion was significantly increased in the total IBS group [µmol, median (Q1;Q3): 5.26 (1.82;11.03) vs. 2.44 (0.91;5.85), P < 0.05], as well as in IBS-C and IBS-D vs. HC. However, differences attenuated when adjusting for confounders. The lactulose/rhamnose ratio was increased in IBS-D vs. HC [0.023 (0.013;0.038) vs. 0.014 (0.008;0.025), P < 0.05], which remained significant after adjustment for confounders. No difference was found in 0-24 and 5-24 h sucralose/erythritol ratio between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Small intestinal permeability is increased in patients with IBS-D compared to healthy controls, irrespective of confounding factors. Adjustment for confounders is necessary when studying intestinal permeability, especially in a heterogeneous disorder such as IBS.