Randomized trial in postprandial functional dyspepsia: Reassurance and diagnostic explanation with or without traditional dietary advice.

BACKGROUND: Almost 80% of individuals with functional dyspepsia experience meal-related symptoms and are diagnosed with postprandial distress syndrome (PDS). However, studies evaluating dietary modifications in PDS are sparse. We performed a single-center randomized trial comparing reassurance and diagnostic explanation (RADE) with or without traditional dietary advice (TDA) in PDS. METHODS: Following a normal upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, individuals with PDS were randomized to a leaflet providing RADE ± TDA; the latter recommending small, regular meals and reducing the intake of caffeine/alcohol/fizzy drinks and high-fat/processed/spicy foods. Questionnaires were completed over 4 weeks, including self-reported adequate relief of dyspeptic symptoms, and the validated Leuven Postprandial Distress Scale (LPDS), Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale, and Nepean Dyspepsia Index for quality of life. The primary endpoint(s) to define clinical response were (i) ≥50% adequate relief of dyspeptic symptoms and (ii) >0.5-point reduction in the PDS subscale of the LPDS (calculated as the mean scores for early satiety, postprandial fullness, and upper abdominal bloating). KEY RESULTS: Of the 53 patients with PDS, 27 were assigned RADE-alone and 26 to additional TDA. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, with a mean age of 39 years, 70% female, 83% white British, and coexistent irritable bowel syndrome in 66%. The primary endpoints of (i) adequate relief of dyspeptic symptoms were met by 33% (n = 9) assigned RADE-alone versus 39% (n = 10) with TDA; p-value = 0.70, while (ii) a reduction of >0.5 points in the PDS subscale was met by 37% (n = 10) assigned RADE-alone versus 27% (n = 7) with TDA; p-value = 0.43. Response rates did not differ according to irritable bowel syndrome status. There were no significant between-group changes in the gastrointestinal symptom rating scale and dyspepsia quality of life. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: This study of predominantly white British patients with PDS found the addition of TDA did not lead to significantly greater symptom reduction compared with RADE alone. Alternate dietary strategies should be explored in this cohort.

Efficacy and Acceptability of Dietary Therapies in Non-Constipated Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Randomized Trial of Traditional Dietary Advice, the Low FODMAP Diet, and the Gluten-Free Diet.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Various diets are proposed as first-line therapies for non-constipated irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) despite insufficient or low-quality evidence. We performed a randomized trial comparing traditional dietary advice (TDA) against the low FODMAP diet (LFD) and gluten-free diet (GFD). METHODS: Patients with Rome IV-defined non-constipated IBS were randomized to TDA, LFD, or GFD (the latter allowing for minute gluten cross-contamination). The primary end point was clinical response after 4 weeks of dietary intervention, as defined by ≥50-point reduction in IBS symptom severity score (IBS-SSS). Secondary end points included (1) changes in individual IBS-SSS items within clinical responders, (2) acceptability and food-related quality of life with dietary therapy, (3) changes in nutritional intake, (4) alterations in stool dysbiosis index, and (5) baseline factors associated with clinical response. RESULTS: The primary end point of ≥50-point reduction in IBS-SSS was met by 42% (n = 14/33) undertaking TDA, 55% (n = 18/33) for LFD, and 58% (n = 19/33) for GFD (P = .43). Responders had similar improvements in IBS-SSS items regardless of their allocated diet. Individuals found TDA cheaper (P < .01), less time-consuming to shop (P < .01), and easier to follow when eating out (P = .03) than the GFD and LFD. TDA was also easier to incorporate into daily life than the LFD (P = .02). Overall reductions in micronutrient and macronutrient intake did not significantly differ across the diets. However, the LFD group had the greatest reduction in total FODMAP content (27.7 g/day before intervention to 7.6 g/day at week 4) compared with the GFD (27.4 g/day to 22.4 g/day) and TDA (24.9 g/day to 15.2 g/day) (P < .01). Alterations in stool dysbiosis index were similar across the diets, with 22%-29% showing reduced dysbiosis, 35%-39% no change, and 35%-40% increased dysbiosis (P = .99). Baseline clinical characteristics and stool dysbiosis index did not predict response to dietary therapy. CONCLUSIONS: TDA, LFD, and GFD are effective approaches in non-constipated IBS, but TDA is the most patient-friendly in terms of cost and convenience. We recommend TDA as the first-choice dietary therapy in non-constipated IBS, with LFD and GFD reserved according to specific patient preferences and specialist dietetic input. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT04072991.

The low FODMAP diet for IBS; A multicentre UK study assessing long term follow up.

BACKGROUND: The low FODMAP diet (LFD) is effective in managing irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in the short term. This study assessed the long-term effect of the LFD on symptoms, nutritional composition and socialising. METHODS: Patients with IBS who received dietetic-led LFD advice were approached at long term follow up (>6 months post LFD advice) from six centres across the United Kingdom. Participants completed questionnaires assessing gastrointestinal symptoms, adherence, nutritional intake, dietary acceptability and food related quality of life (QOL). RESULTS: 205 participants completed the study, with a mean follow up of 44 months (3.7 years). Adequate symptom relief was noted in 60% of individuals at long term follow up, with 76% being on the personalisation phase of the LFD (pLFD). Mean nutritional intake did not differ between individuals on the pLFD versus habitual diet, with no difference in fructan intake (2.9 g/d vs 2.9 g/d, p = 0.96). The majority (80%) of individuals on the pLFD consumed specific 'free-from' products at the long term, with the purchase of gluten or wheat free products being the commonest (68%). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients follow the pLFD in the long term, with a large proportion purchasing gluten or wheat free products to manage their symptoms.

National survey evaluating the provision of gastroenterology dietetic services in England.

Aims: The aim of the study was to assess the provision of dietetic services for coeliac disease (CD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods: Hospitals within all National Health Service trusts in England were approached (n=209). A custom-designed web-based questionnaire was circulated via contact methods of email, post or telephone. Individuals/teams with knowledge of gastrointestinal (GI) dietetic services within their trust were invited to complete. Results: 76% of trusts (n=158) provided GI dietetic services, with responses received from 78% of these trusts (n=123). The median number of dietitians per 100 000 population was 3.64 (range 0.15-16.60), which differed significantly between regions (p=0.03). The most common individual consultation time for patients with CD, IBS and IBD was 15-30 min (43%, 44% and 54%, respectively). GI dietetic services were delivered both via individual and group counselling, with individual counselling being the more frequent delivery method available (93% individual vs 34% group). A significant proportion of trusts did not deliver any specialist dietetic clinics for CD, IBS and IBD (49% (n=60), 50% (n=61) and 72% (n=88), respectively). Conclusion: There is an inequity of GI dietetic services across England, with regional differences in the level of provision and extent of specialist care. Allocated time for clinics appears to be insufficient compared with time advocated in the literature. Group clinics are becoming a more common method of dietetic service delivery for CD and IBS. National guidance on GI dietetic service delivery is required to ensure equity of dietetic services across England.

A Gluten Reduction Is the Patients' Choice for a Dietary 'Bottom Up' Approach in IBS-A Comment on "A 5Ad Dietary Protocol for Functional Bowel Disorders" Nutrients 2019, 11, 1938.

We read the article by Ibrahim and Stribling [...].

To start or not: Factors to consider when implementing routine probiotic use in the NICU.

Supplementation of probiotics to very low birth weight (VLBW) infants has been extensively studied, with multiple meta-analyses reporting probiotics decrease the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and death. Despite availability of this evidence, the decision to initiate routine probiotic supplementation to preterm infants continues to be a complex one. There are uncertainties regarding the use of probiotics, including selecting the appropriate product, dose and target population. Additionally, availability of specific probiotic products and regulatory oversight varies by country, raising concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of specific probiotic products. In this review, we summarize the latest evidence on probiotic use in preterm infants and discuss considerations that may help guide clinicians who are considering routine probiotic supplementation.