Bailliere's clinical gastroenterology最新文献

The main diseases associated with dyspepsia are peptic ulcer disease, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and non-ulcer dyspepsia. Increased gastric acid secretion is a characteristic of most duodenal ulcer patients and of a small minority of non-ulcer dyspepsia and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients. Although acid secretion is normal in most gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients, the condition is mainly the result of excess exposure of the distal oesophagus to acid refluxing from the stomach. Increased mucosal sensitivity to acid is involved in the aetiology of dyspeptic symptoms in the majority of patients with peptic ulcer disease and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, and in a minority of non-ulcer dyspepsia subjects. Gastric acid, therefore, plays an important role in both the aetiology of dyspeptic diseases and in the aetiology of dyspeptic symptoms.

Estimates of the prevalence of dyspepsia in the community have varied between studies. This is, in large part, because of differences in the definitions used. Roughly speaking, 15–20% of the general population will report recurrent upper abdominal pain over the course of a year. Most of these people do not have endoscopic abnormalities and thus meet the criteria for functional dyspepsia. These symptoms appear to come and go, which makes determination of the incidence of dyspepsia quite difficult. Most studies have not distinguished whether the onset of symptoms represents recurrence or de novo symptoms. Approximately 5–10% of the population will develop symptoms of dyspepsia in a given year, and 50% of people with dyspepsia will lose their symptoms the following year. Regardless of the exact figures, all studies have demonstrated dyspepsia to be exceedingly common in the community.

The causes of functional dyspepsia remain unclear. Research has linked other functional gastrointestinal disorders, particularly irritable bowel syndrome, to a history of physical or sexual abuse, psychosocial distress and certain psychiatric disorders. In functional dyspepsia, there is a possibility of certain psychiatric disorders, particularly alcohol abuse and eating disorders, indirectly influencing the development of functional dyspepsia-like symptoms. However, the literature on possible psychosocial correlates in functional dyspepsia is not as mature as the literature on irritable bowel syndrome. This paper critically reviews the psychosocial dimensions and implications for the psychotherapeutic treatment of functional dyspepsia.

Managing patients with new-onset dyspeptic symptoms represents a real challenge in clinical decision-making. The major controversy has been over the optimal management strategy of patients with new-onset dyspeptic symptoms who do not present with alarm symptoms. Since unaided clinical diagnosis is unreliable, proposed management strategies have included empirical treatment algorithms, computer-assisted predictive score models and Helicobacter pylori-based strategies such as test-and-scope or test-and-treat algorithms. Endoscopy remains the diagnostic ‘gold standard’, and the management should ideally be based on endoscopic diagnosis. Because of economic constraints and increasing waiting lists, this is not possible. When precise and comprehensive guidelines have been formulated, future patients will probably be managed in primary care by a Helicobacter test-and-treat policy, leaving only empirical treatment failures for specialist evaluation.

There is international agreement that dyspepsia refers to pain or discomfort centred in the upper abdomen. However, the term ‘discomfort’ has been variably defined. While other symptoms may often be simultaneously present, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease can usually be clearly distinguished by the presence of predominant heartburn. Dyspepsia is a frequent reason for consultation in primary care and in gastrointestinal practice. With the widespread availability and utilization of endoscopy, it has become evident that a structural (or organic) explanation is found in only a minority of patients presenting with dyspepsia. Operationally, functional dyspepsia is defined as persistent or recurrent dyspepsia for 3 or more months in the absence of a clinically identifiable structural disease causing the symptoms. It has been proposed, based on symptoms, that functional dyspepsia be subdivided into symptom subgroups to promote patient homogeneity. The initially proposed ‘clustering’ of symptoms into ulcer-like and dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia has proved a dismal failure because of the considerable overlap observed, the lack of stability over time and the failure to identify robust pathophysiological abnormalities or responses to therapy. A subcategorization based upon the most bothersome symptom is theoretically more attractive but needs to be prospectively and rigorously tested.

Gastrointestinal motor abnormalities are frequent findings in patients with functional dyspepsia. However, these abnormalities are rather non-specific and seem to be restricted to a proportion of patients. Furthermore, they are not necessarily time-linked to symptom perception. The relationship of digestive motor derangements and symptoms in functional dyspepsia remains, therefore, unsettled. A variety of methodological and conceptual shortcomings characterize many of the studies investigating the relationship between gastrointestinal motility disorders and dyspeptic symptoms, and this obviously contributes to a higher level of uncertainty in the field. Recent reports suggest that gastrointestinal dysmotility is associated with perception of some dyspeptic symptoms, at least in a subset of patients. Well-conducted studies using appropriate methodology are needed to verify whether gastrointestinal motor disorders play a causal role in functional dyspepsia and whether this is of clinical relevance.

Symptoms of functional dyspepsia, such as epigastric pain, bloating or early satiety and nausea, are non-specific and are likely to arise from different mechanisms. Current evidence suggests the presence of at least two subgroups: patients who respond to a prolonged course of acid suppression and patients who show a significant overlap of symptoms with other functional gastrointestinal disorders such as irritable bowel syndrome. An enhanced sensitivity of visceral afferent pathways with or without associated autonomic dysregulation appears to play an important role in the aetiology of symptoms in the second group. In the absence of visceral hypersensitivity, neither the slowing of gastric emptying nor the presence of chronic gastritis appears to be sufficient to cause symptoms of functional dyspepsia. The mechanisms and aetiology of visceral hypersensitivity are incompletely understood. An alteration in the interplay between vagal and spinal afferents, and the inadequate activation of antinociceptive systems in response to tissue irritation, may play a role in symptom generation.

To determine whether functional dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome are different entities, epidemiological data, factor analysis studies, physiological data and associated psychological symptoms were reviewed. Between 30% and 60% of patients with either diagnosis also meet the criteria for the other diagnosis, a level greater than expected to occur by chance but not sufficient to infer an identity. Most factor analysis studies identify independent clusters of symptoms corresponding to functional dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome. Visceral hypersensitivity is seen throughout the gastrointestinal tract in both disorders, but the motility patterns seen in association with functional dyspepsia (principally antral hypomotility and delayed gastric emptying) differ from the motility patterns seen in irritable bowel syndrome. Psychological symptoms are similar in these two disorders but are not believed to be aetiological for either of them. Thus, based on a factor analysis of gastrointestinal symptoms and differences in intestinal motility, functional dyspepsia and irritable bowel syndrome appear to be different entities.

Functional dyspepsia is a chronic disorder of unknown aetiology. The lack of endoscopic abnormalities in patients with this disorder has led many physicians to believe that gastrooesophageal reflux disease may be responsible for most symptoms. Our group has addressed this issue, by pathophysiological studies in a large cohort of Dundee patients with persistent dyspeptic symptoms. Peptic ulcer and gallstones were excluded in all patients by appropriate tests. Ambulatory pH monitoring showed oesophageal acid reflux that lay above the conventional diagnostic threshold in approximately 20% of patients. This subset was diagnosed as having gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

In the remainder, moderate or severe reflux-like symptoms were reported by approximately 44% patients, who were categorized as reflux-like functional dyspepsia. Reflux symptoms were mild or absent in 36% patients, who were categorized as non-reflux-like dyspepsia. While oesophageal pH profiles lay within the conventional normal range in both of these functional dyspepsia subgroups, patients with reflux-like functional dyspepsia had significantly greater acid exposure values, including total oesophageal acid exposure time, percentage time at a pH of less than 4.0, DeMeester scores and pain reflux event correlation. Hence patients with reflux-like functional dyspepsia have oesophageal acid exposure that lies below the diagnostic threshold for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease but exceeds that of patients with non-reflux dyspepsia. The high pain/reflux event correlation in reflux-like functional dyspepsia suggests that subthreshold oesophageal acid exposure may be associated with troublesome reflux symptoms.