[Functional colopathy : still relevant ? Let's move to irritable bowel syndrome]. / La colopathie fonctionnelle : toujours d'actualité ? Place au syndrome de l'intestin irritable.

Irritable bowel syndrome is a functional disorder that is frequently encountered in general practice as well as in specialized consultations. Diagnostic criteria have been well established but there is currently no specific diagnostic test. The various gastroenterology societies have recently published recommendations for diagnostic and therapeutic management adapted to the pathophysiology and the availability of treatments in different countries. This article summarizes the main lines of these recommendations and in particular those of the Belgian consensus.

Le syndrome de l'intestin irritable est un trouble fonctionnel fréquemment rencontré en médecine générale comme en consultation spécialisée. Les critères diagnostiques ont bien été établis, mais il n'y a actuellement pas de test diagnostique spécifique. Les différentes sociétés de gastroentérologie ont récemment publié des recommandations pour une prise en charge diagnostique et thérapeutique adaptée à la physiopathologie, mais aussi à la disponibilité des traitements selon les pays. Cet article résume les grandes lignes de ces recommandations et, en particulier, celles du consensus belge.

Effects of Rome IV Definitions of Functional Dyspepsia Subgroups in Secondary Care.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is subdivided into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) according to the Rome III consensus. In clinical practice, there is a major overlap between these subgroups. The Rome IV criteria included postprandially occurring symptoms in the PDS subgroup. We aimed to analyze the effects of the Rome IV criteria, compared with Rome III, on FD subgroups in patients recruited from secondary care. METHODS: Patients with FD (n = 224; mean age, 43 ± 1 y; 77% women) were recruited from secondary-care units in Belgium and filled out symptom questionnaires, allowing subdivision according to Rome III and Rome IV criteria and identification of postprandial symptoms. Symptom patterns and demographics were compared between the subgroups. Statistical analysis was performed using the t test and the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: According to the Rome III criteria, 25% of participants had PDS, 8% had EPS, and 67% had an overlap. Postprandial fullness, early satiation, and bloating were present in significantly more patients in the PDS and overlap groups than the EPS group (P < .0001). A higher proportion of patients in the overlap group showed symptoms such as postprandial epigastric pain and nausea than in the EPS group (both P ≤ .02). With the Rome IV criteria, the overlap group was reduced to 35%; 57% of patients were considered to have PDS and 8% to have EPS. Postprandial pain was significantly more prevalent in the PDS than in the EPS group (P ≤ .002), and postprandial nausea was significantly more prevalent in the PDS group than the overlap group (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with Rome III criteria, the Rome IV criteria significantly reduces the overlap between PDS and EPS groups. Studies are needed to determine if Rome IV subgroups are associated differently with psychological comorbidities and treatment responses.

A double-blind randomized, multicenter, placebo-controlled study of itopride in functional dyspepsia postprandial distress syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Itopride, a mixed D2 antagonist and cholinesterase inhibitor, has prokinetic effects on gastric motility. The Leuven Postprandial Distress Scale is a validated patient-reported outcome instrument for functional dyspepsia (FD) postprandial distress syndrome (PDS). We aimed to use the LPDS to assess treatment outcome in PDS and PDS/EPS (epigastric pain syndrome). METHODS: Patients with PDS, with or without non-predominant EPS symptoms, were enrolled in an 8-week double-blind placebo-controlled multi-center trial with itopride (100 mg t.i.d.). Patients completed LPDS diaries and questionnaires to assess treatment response. Mann-Whitney test and mixed models were used. RESULTS: One hundred patients (79% females, 39.1 ± 1.5 yo) were included. No significant difference was observed between treatment arms (p = 0.6). Compared to baseline, itopride treatment significantly improved the LPDS score (p = 0.001) and all individual symptoms (p < 0.0001). In the placebo arm, this was only the case for belching and epigastric pain (p < 0.05). In an exploratory analysis, outcomes in "pure" PDS (n = 45) and overlapping PDS/EPS (n = 55) patients were assessed and showed that the latter subgroup has the largest benefit with itopride compared to placebo (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Using the LPDS score in a pilot controlled trial in FD, itopride shows no therapeutic benefit over placebo after 8 weeks of treatment. In an exploratory post hoc analysis, itopride but not placebo was associated with improvement of symptoms compared to baseline, and this was most prominent in patients with overlapping PDS/EPS. The efficacy of itopride in this subgroup needs to be evaluated in a large study using the same outcome measure. (clinialtrials.org ref.: NCT04647955).

Epidemiology of inflammatory bowel diseases in the elderly in the province of Liège.

OBJECTIVE: Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are heterogeneous diseases which affect preferentially young adults. The late onset could represent a particular form of expression of these diseases. The aim of our prospective study was to describe the incidence of IBD in patients older than 60 years as well as their clinical pattern in comparison with a population younger than 60. METHODS: A standardized questionnaire for each new case diagnosed in the province of Liège between 01/06/1993 and 31/05/1996 was completed. RESULTS: During the three years, 270 patients were enrolled. In group IBD > 60 years old, there were 60 new cases, including 23 cases with Crohn's disease (CD) (38%), 30 with ulcerative colitis (UC) (50%), and 7 with undetermined colitis (IC) (12%). The proportion of CD was significantly lower in the group IBD > 60 years old than in the group<60 (114 CD (54%), 81 UC (39%) and 15 IC (7%); P=0.04). The annual incidence tended to be higher for UC than for CD in group IBD > 60 (4.5 and 3.5 per 100,000, respectively) while it was the contrary in younger patients (3.4 and 4.8 per 100,000, respectively). There was no striking difference in the clinical features for both diseases in the two groups, except more frequent diarrhea, weight loss and extraintestinal symptoms in CD patients<60 years old. CONCLUSIONS: In the province of Liège, the incidence of IBD in people older than 60 years is high. IBD in the elderly is characterized by a lower proportion of CD than in the younger population. Clinical features tend to be the same whatever the age at diagnosis for each disease.