Explore the vast range of titles available.

IBS affects 7 to 16% of the U.S. population, with subtypes characterized by diarrhea, constipation, or both. Patients may have a response to dietary modification, and an effective doctor–patient relationship may increase symptom control. The irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic and sometimes disabling functional bowel disorder. 1 , 2 Traditionally, this functional diagnostic label has been applied when no obvious structural or biochemical abnormalities are found, but emerging evidence suggests that distinct pathophysiological disturbances may account for the symptoms and that IBS is unlikely to be one disease or merely a psychiatric (somatosensory) disorder. 2 The Rome IV criteria, 1 derived from a consensus process by a multinational group of experts in functional gastrointestinal disorders, constitute the current standard for diagnosing IBS. According to these criteria, IBS is diagnosed on the basis of recurrent abdominal pain . . .

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) remains one of the most common gastrointestinal disorders seen by clinicians in both primary and secondary care. Since publication of the last British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guideline in 2007, substantial advances have been made in understanding its complex pathophysiology, resulting in its re-classification as a disorder of gut-brain interaction, rather than a functional gastrointestinal disorder. Moreover, there has been a considerable amount of new evidence published concerning the diagnosis, investigation and management of IBS. The primary aim of this guideline, commissioned by the BSG, is to review and summarise the current evidence to inform and guide clinical practice, by providing a practical framework for evidence-based management of patients. One of the strengths of this guideline is that the recommendations for treatment are based on evidence derived from a comprehensive search of the medical literature, which was used to inform an update of a series of trial-based and network meta-analyses assessing the efficacy of dietary, pharmacological and psychological therapies in treating IBS. Specific recommendations have been made according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system, summarising both the strength of the recommendations and the overall quality of evidence. Finally, this guideline identifies novel treatments that are in development, as well as highlighting areas of unmet need for future research.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most common disorders of gut–brain interaction worldwide, defined according to patterns of gastrointestinal symptoms as described by the Rome diagnostic criteria. However, these criteria, developed with reference to research conducted largely in Western populations, might be limited in their applicability to other countries and cultures. Epidemiological data show a wide variation in the prevalence of IBS globally and more rigorous studies are needed to accurately determine any differences that might exist between countries as well as the potential explanations. The effects of IBS on the individual, in terms of their quality of life, and on health-care delivery and society, in terms of economic costs, are considerable. Although the magnitude of these effects seems to be comparable between nations, their precise nature can vary based on the existence of societal and cultural differences. The pathophysiology of IBS is complex and incompletely understood; genetics, diet and the gut microbiome are all recognized risk factors, but the part they play might be influenced by geography and culture, and hence their relative importance might vary between countries. This Review aims to provide an overview of the burden of IBS in a global context, to discuss future implications for the care of people with IBS worldwide, and to identify key areas for further research.Irritable bowel syndrome is one of the most common gut disorders worldwide and is defined according to patterns of gastrointestinal symptoms that might be limited in their applicability to all countries and cultures. This Review provides an overview of the global burden of irritable bowel syndrome and discusses the implications for the care of patients worldwide.

Irritable bowel syndrome is a functional gastrointestinal disorder with symptoms including abdominal pain associated with a change in stool form or frequency. The condition affects between 5% and 10% of otherwise healthy individuals at any one point in time and, in most people, runs a relapsing and remitting course. The best described risk factor is acute enteric infection, but irritable bowel syndrome is also more common in people with psychological comorbidity and in young adult women than in the rest of the general population. The pathophysiology of irritable bowel syndrome is incompletely understood, but it is well established that there is disordered communication between the gut and the brain, leading to motility disturbances, visceral hypersensitivity, and altered CNS processing. Other less reproducible mechanisms might include genetic associations, alterations in gastrointestinal microbiota, and disturbances in mucosal and immune function. In most people, diagnosis can be made on the basis of clinical history with limited and judicious use of investigations, unless alarm symptoms such as weight loss or rectal bleeding are present, or there is a family history of inflammatory bowel disease or coeliac disease. Once the diagnosis is made, an empathetic approach is key and can improve quality of life and symptoms, and reduce health-care expenditure. The mainstays of treatment include patient education about the condition, dietary changes, soluble fibre, and antispasmodic drugs. Other treatments tend to be reserved for people with severe symptoms and include central neuromodulators, intestinal secretagogues, drugs acting on opioid or 5-HT receptors, or minimally absorbed antibiotics (all of which are selected according to predominant bowel habit), as well as psychological therapies. Increased understanding of the pathophysiology of irritable bowel syndrome in the past 10 years has led to a healthy pipeline of novel drugs in development.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a highly prevalent, chronic disorder that significantly reduces patients' quality of life. Advances in diagnostic testing and in therapeutic options for patients with IBS led to the development of this first-ever American College of Gastroenterology clinical guideline for the management of IBS using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Twenty-five clinically important questions were assessed after a comprehensive literature search; 9 questions focused on diagnostic testing; 16 questions focused on therapeutic options. Consensus was obtained using a modified Delphi approach, and based on GRADE methodology, we endorse the followingWe suggest that a positive diagnostic strategy as compared to a diagnostic strategy of exclusion be used to improve time to initiating appropriate therapy. We suggest that serologic testing be performed to rule out celiac disease in patients with IBS and diarrhea symptoms. We suggest that fecal calprotectin be checked in patients with suspected IBS and diarrhea symptoms to rule out inflammatory bowel disease. We recommend a limited trial of a low fermentable oligosaccharides, disacchardies, monosaccharides, polyols (FODMAP) diet in patients with IBS to improve global symptoms. We recommend the use of chloride channel activators and guanylate cyclase activators to treat global IBS with constipation symptoms. We recommend the use of rifaximin to treat global IBS with diarrhea symptoms. We suggest that gut-directed psychotherapy be used to treat global IBS symptoms. Additional statements and information regarding diagnostic strategies, specific drugs, doses, and duration of therapy can be found in the guideline.

Up to 20% of people worldwide develop gastrointestinal symptoms following a meal 1 , leading to decreased quality of life, substantial morbidity and high medical costs. Although the interest of both the scientific and lay communities in this issue has increased markedly in recent years, with the worldwide introduction of gluten-free and other diets, the underlying mechanisms of food-induced abdominal complaints remain largely unknown. Here we show that a bacterial infection and bacterial toxins can trigger an immune response that leads to the production of dietary-antigen-specific IgE antibodies in mice, which are limited to the intestine. Following subsequent oral ingestion of the respective dietary antigen, an IgE- and mast-cell-dependent mechanism induced increased visceral pain. This aberrant pain signalling resulted from histamine receptor H 1 -mediated sensitization of visceral afferents. Moreover, injection of food antigens (gluten, wheat, soy and milk) into the rectosigmoid mucosa of patients with irritable bowel syndrome induced local oedema and mast cell activation. Our results identify and characterize a peripheral mechanism that underlies food-induced abdominal pain, thereby creating new possibilities for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome and related abdominal pain disorders. In mice, oral tolerance to food antigens can break down after enteric infection, and this leads to food-induced pain resembling irritable bowel syndrome in humans.

Foods high in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) exacerbate symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS); however, their mechanism of action is unknown. We hypothesized that a high-FODMAP (HFM) diet increases visceral nociception by inducing dysbiosis and that the FODMAP-altered gut microbial community leads to intestinal pathology. We fed rats an HFM and showed that HFM increases rat fecal Gram-negative bacteria, elevates lipopolysaccharides (LPS), and induces intestinal pathology, as indicated by inflammation, barrier dysfunction, and visceral hypersensitivity (VH). These manifestations were prevented by antibiotics and reversed by low-FODMAP (LFM) diet. Additionally, intracolonic administration of LPS or fecal supernatant (FS) from HFM-fed rats caused intestinal barrier dysfunction and VH, which were blocked by the LPS antagonist LPS-RS or by TLR4 knockdown. Fecal LPS was higher in IBS patients than in healthy subjects (HS), and IBS patients on a 4-week LFM diet had improved IBS symptoms and reduced fecal LPS levels. Intracolonic administration of FS from IBS patients, but not FS from HS or LFM-treated IBS patients, induced VH in rats, which was ameliorated by LPS-RS. Our findings indicate that HFM-associated gut dysbiosis and elevated fecal LPS levels induce intestinal pathology, thereby modulating visceral nociception and IBS symptomatology, and might provide an explanation for the success of LFM diet in IBS patients.

ObjectiveOur aim was to evaluate the association between visceral hypersensitivity and GI symptom severity in large cohorts of patients with functional GI disorder (FGID) and to adjust for psychological factors and general tendency to report symptoms.DesignWe included five cohorts of patients with FGIDs (IBS or functional dyspepsia; n=1144), who had undergone visceral sensitivity testing using balloon distensions (gastric fundus, descending colon or rectum) and completed questionnaires to assess GI symptom severity, non-GI somatic symptoms, anxiety and depression. Subjects were divided into sensitivity tertiles based on pain/discomfort thresholds. GI symptom severity was compared between sensitivity tertiles in each cohort and corrected for somatisation, and anxiety and depression.ResultsIn all five cohorts, GI symptom severity increased gradually with increasing visceral sensitivity, with significant differences in GI symptom severity between the sensitivity tertiles (p<0.0001), with small to medium effect sizes (partial η2: 0.047–0.11). The differences between sensitivity tertiles remained significant in all cohorts after correction for anxiety and depression, and also after correction for non-GI somatic symptom reporting in all of the cohorts (p<0.05).ConclusionsA gradual increase in GI symptom severity with increasing GI sensitivity was demonstrated in IBS and functional dyspepsia, which was consistent across several large patient groups from different countries, different methods to assess sensitivity and assessments in different parts of the GI tract. This association was independent of tendency to report symptoms or anxiety/depression comorbidity. These findings confirm that visceral hypersensitivity is a contributor to GI symptom generation in FGIDs.

ObjectiveA diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAP) is recommended for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), if general lifestyle and dietary advice fails. However, although the impact of a low FODMAP diet on individual IBS symptoms has been examined in some randomised controlled trials (RCTs), there has been no recent systematic assessment, and individual trials have studied numerous alternative or control interventions, meaning the best comparator is unclear. We performed a network meta-analysis addressing these uncertainties.DesignWe searched the medical literature through to 2 April 2021 to identify RCTs of a low FODMAP diet in IBS. Efficacy was judged using dichotomous assessment of improvement in global IBS symptoms or improvement in individual IBS symptoms, including abdominal pain, abdominal bloating or distension, and bowel habit. Data were pooled using a random effects model, with efficacy reported as pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs, and interventions ranked according to their P-score.ResultsWe identified 13 eligible RCTs (944 patients). Based on failure to achieve an improvement in global IBS symptoms, a low FODMAP diet ranked first vs habitual diet (RR of symptoms not improving=0.67; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.91, P-score=0.99), and was superior to all other interventions. Low FODMAP diet ranked first for abdominal pain severity, abdominal bloating or distension severity and bowel habit, although for the latter it was not superior to any other intervention. A low FODMAP diet was superior to British Dietetic Association (BDA)/National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) dietary advice for abdominal bloating or distension (RR=0.72; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.94). BDA/NICE dietary advice was not superior to any other intervention in any analysis.ConclusionIn a network analysis, low FODMAP diet ranked first for all endpoints studied. However, most trials were based in secondary or tertiary care and did not study effects of FODMAP reintroduction and personalisation on symptoms.

ObjectivesThe diagnostic criteria for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) have recently been updated from Rome III to Rome IV. Whereas in Rome III a diagnosis of IBS entailed chronic abdominal pain or discomfort at least 3 days per month, in Rome IV the term discomfort has been removed and the frequency of abdominal pain increased to at least 1 day per week. We examined how this change in IBS criteria impacts on clinical characteristics and pathophysiological factors.MethodsA total of 542 Swedish subjects with Rome III IBS completed a baseline questionnaire enquiring for the number of abdominal pain days in the last 10 days; this was subsequently used as a surrogate marker to identify Rome IV IBS, in that (a) those with 0 or 1 day of pain were classed as Rome IV-negative, and (b) those with ≥2 days of pain were classed as Rome IV-positive. Comparisons were made between Rome IV-positive and -negative IBS groups for demographics, IBS subtype, gastrointestinal and psychological symptoms, somatisation, fatigue, disease-specific quality of life, rectal sensitivity, and oro-anal transit time.ResultsOverall, 85% of Rome III IBS patients fulfilled the Rome IV criteria for IBS, but 15% did not. Rome IV-positive subjects were significantly more likely to be female, have poorer quality of life, greater pain severity, bloating, somatisation, fatigue, and rectal sensitivity than Rome IV-negative subjects. There were no differences in severity of anxiety or depression, IBS subtypes, bowel habit dissatisfaction, or oro-anal transit time. Finally, increasing number of pain days correlated positively with symptoms and visceral hypersensitivity.ConclusionsMost Rome III-positive IBS patients seeking healthcare fulfil the Rome IV IBS criteria. They constitute a more severe group than those who lose their IBS diagnosis.