Category Archives: Gastroenterology

Breathing (Diaphragmatic) Helps Belching and Reflux Symptoms

Posted on by

A recent prospective study (A M-L Ong et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 407-16) of 36 patients (median age 45) showed that diaphragmatic breathing was helpful for PPI-refractory GERD symptoms/belching.  Patients enrolled all had “troublesome belching” for 6 months and GERD. Patients underwent high resolution manometry and pH-impedance study.

Key findings:

  • 9 of 15 (60%) in the diaphragmatic treatment group reduced their belching visual analog score by ≥50%, whereas none of the control group achieved the primary outcome
  • Treatment also resulted in lower GERD symptoms based on reflux disease questionnaire score -decrease of 12.2 vs 3.1 in the control group (P=.01)
  • Treatment improved QOL scores, based on Reflux-Qual Short form (15.7 increase for treatment group compared to 2.4 decrease in control group)
  • Treatment effects were sustained at 4 months after treatment

My take: Diaphragmatic breathing can be a useful adjunct in GERD, particularly in patients with belching.

Related blog post: Treatment for rumination and belching

 

Foggy Morning in Sandy Springs

Baclofen for Rumination

Posted on by

A recent randomized, placebo-controlled cross-over study by A Pauweis et al (Am J Gastroenterol 2018; 113: 97-104) indicated that baclofen improved rumination syndrome in adults (mean age 42 years). Thanks to Ben Gold for this reference.

Baclofen (dosed at 10 mg TID) had the following effects:

  • reduced rumination episodes from 13 (8-22) to 8 (3-11) (P=0.004)
  • increased lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure (17.8 vs. 13.1, P=0.0002) and lowered number of transient LES relaxations (4 vs 7, P=0.17)
  • overall treatment evaluation was superior after baclofen compared to placebo (P=0.03)

My take: In this study, baclofen improved symptoms of rumination and regurgitation, but not supragastric belching.

Related posts:

“Escape” stairs in Hoover Dam

Isopropyl Alcohol -Antiemetic Aromatherapy

Posted on by

April MD et al. Aromatherapy versus oral ondansetron for antiemetic therapy among adult emergency department patients: A randomized controlled trial. Ann Emerg Med 2018 Feb 17; [e-pub]. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.01.016) Thanks to Ann Beach for this reference.

Review/excerpt of this study from NEJM Journal Watch: by Daniel J. Pallin, MD, MPH.

In the current trial, 120 adult ED patients with nausea or vomiting who did not require intravenous access were randomized to inhaled isopropyl alcohol plus 4 mg oral ondansetron; inhaled isopropyl alcohol plus oral placebo; or inhaled saline plus 4 mg oral ondansetron. Isopropyl alcohol was provided in the form of a standard alcohol swab. Patients received a single dose of the oral intervention but could sniff alcohol or saline swabs repeatedly. Nausea was measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale at baseline and 30 minutes.

Mean nausea scores decreased by 30 mm in the alcohol/ondansetron group, 32 mm in the alcohol/placebo group, and 9 mm in the saline/ondansetron group. Rescue antiemetic therapy was given to 28%, 25%, and 45% of each group, respectively. Differences between alcohol and saline groups were statistically significant. Patients in the inhaled alcohol groups also had better nausea control at the time of discharge and reported higher satisfaction with nausea treatment. No adverse events occurred. The mechanism of action is currently unknown.

Dr. Pallin’s comments on study:

It is uncommon for us to assign a rating of “Practice Changing” to a small, single-center study, but these results are truly remarkable and are consistent with prior research. For patients not obviously requiring IV therapy, we should treat nausea with repeated inhalations from an isopropyl alcohol swab instead of administering any other drug. And, although this study provides no direct evidence of benefit to patients who do require IV therapy, there would seem to be little downside to trying this simple and safe intervention in that group, too.

My take: Who is doing the pediatric study to try to replicate these results in the pediatric population?

Related blog posts:

Foggy Morning in Sandy Springs

Never Too Old for Celiac Disease

Posted on by

A recent article (P Collin et al. AP&T 2018; 47: 563-72) reviews the presentation of celiac disease in later years (Thanks to Ben Gold for this reference).

Key findings:

  • Approximately 25% of celiac diagnoses are made at age ≥60 years
  • ~4% of celiac diagnoses are made at age ≥80 years
  • About 60% of individuals with celiac disease remain undetected
  • Adherence with gluten free diet results in “resolution of symptoms and improvement in laboratory indices…in over 90% of patients”

This review also focuses on specific related problems besides epidemiology: malabsorption, dermatitis herpetifromis, bone mineral density and fractures, autoimmune disease, heart disease, neurological disturbances, and malignancy.

Bright Angel Trail

Colorectal Cancer: Of Mice and Microbiota

Posted on by

A recent study (SH Wong et al. Gastroenterol 2017; 153: 1621-33) highlights the potential role of the microbiota and colorectal cancer (CRC).

In this study, the stool from either patients with CRC or control patients was gavaged into mice twice a week for 5 weeks.  One group of mice  had received azoxymethane (AOM) which induces neoplasia and the other group were germ-free mice.  Extensive studies involving immunohistochemistry, expresssion microarray, quantitative polymerase chain reaction, immunoblot, and flow cytometry.

Key findings:

  • Conventional, AOM-treated mice who received gavage from patients with CRC had significantly higher proportions of high-grade dysplasia (P<.05) and macroscopic polyps (P<.01)
  • Among the germ-free mice fed with stool from patients with CRC, there was a higher proportion of proliferating Ki-67-positve cells
  • These findings correlated with more dysbiosis in the mice who received stool from patients with CRC and with upregulation of genes involved in cell proliferation, stemness, apoptosis, angiogenesis, and invasiveness

“This study provides evidence that the fecal microbiota from patients with CRC can promote tumorigenesis in germ-free mice and mice given a carcinogen.”

My take: This study shows that microbiota clearly influence the risk of CRC.  I infer from this study that this could explain the potential healthy roles of diets with more fruits and vegetables, that promote healthier microbiota as well as the potential detrimental role of diets with more processed meats.

Related study: L Liu et al. Association between Inflammatory Diet Pattern and Risk of Colorectal Carcinoma Subtypes Classified by Immune Responses to Tumor Gastroenterol 2017; 153 1517-30.  Using two databases from 2 prospective cohorts with followup of 124,433 participants, inflammatory diets had a higher risk of a colorectal cancer subtype.

Related blog posts:

Bright Angel Trail

What Happens Four Years After Fecal Microbiota Transplantation?

Posted on by

A recent study (J Jalanka et al. AP&T 2018; 47: 371-9-thanks to Ben Gold for this reference) provide long-term data of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT).

In this study of 84 adult patients who were treated for C difficile infection, 45 who had received FMT and 39 treated with antibiotics, the authors determined the frequency of adverse sequelae at 3.8 years using a retrospective questionnaire.

Key findings:

  • There were no difference in the development of severe diseases between FMT recipients and control patients (eg. IBD, cancer, autoimmune diseases, allergy, and neurological diseases)
  • There were no differences in weight gain
  • FMT patients reported faster improvements in bowel habits and reported that their mental health improved after treatment
  • FMT patients had fewer symptoms of functional gastrointestinal disorders than the control (antibiotic) patients

The authors note that FMT is frequently recommended based on three recurrences of C difficile infection and that their study would support using FMT earlier as a treatment option.

My take: Though a small study, these data suggest that FMT is effective and without long-term consequences.

How Good Is Your ERCPist?

Posted on by

An interesting study and accompanying editorial (RN Keswani et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15: 1866-75, & P Cotton Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15:1855-57) point out that ERCP is more successful in high volume centers and with high volume (HV) endoscopists.

The study was a systematic review and meta-analysis.  The threshold for low volume for endoscopist was < 27 case/year and for centers of <156 cases/year.  However, this data is not widely available.

  • In this study with 59,437 ERCPs, HV endoscopists had OR of 1.6 for success compared to LV endoscopist.
  • Similarly HV centers had OR of 2.0 for successful ERCP.
  • Post-ERCP adverse risks were lower for HV endoscopists with OR of 0.7

In addition, the level of complexity for the cases matters a lot. Dr. Cotton breaks down the complexity of procedures:

  • Standard complexity includes cannulation of bile duct, biliary stent removal/exchange, biliary stone removal <10 mm, treating bile leaks, treating benign and malignant strictures, and placing prophylactic stents..
  • Advanced procedure complexity includes any of the above procedures after Billroth II, minor papilla cannulaiton, removing biliary stents that have migrated internally, fine needle aspiration, treating pancreatic strictures, removing small (< 5 mm), mobile pancreatic stones, treating biliary strictures at hilum or more proximal
  • Highly technical complexity (“advanced tertiary”) includes removal of internally migrated pancreatic stents, intraductal image-guided therapy (eg. PDT EHL), pancreatic stones impacted or >5 mm, intrahepatic stones, pseudocyst drainage, ampullectomy, ERCP after Whipple or roux-en-Y bariatric surgery

My take: The ultimate goal is high success rates and lower complication rates.  Highly proficient endoscopists and high volume centers achieve these goals more consistently, particularly for more complicated ERCP procedures.

Grand Canyon near Phantom Ranch

Oral Capsules for Fecal Microbiota Transplantation

Posted on by

A recent study (D Kao et al.JAMA. 2017;318(20):1985-1993. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.17077) showed that oral stool capsules are as effective as stool delivered via colonoscopy for recurrent C difficile infection (RCDI).  Thanks to Ben Gold for this reference.

Findings  In this noninferiority randomized clinical trial that included 116 adults with RCDI, the proportion without recurrence over 12 weeks was 96.2% after a single treatment in a group treated with oral capsules and in a group treated via colonoscopy, meeting the noninferiority margin of 15%.

My take: This study adds to the literature that oral delivery is effective in fecal microbiota transplantation and that capsules could be a convenient way to deliver.

Bright Angel Trail, Grand Canyon

Another Study: Low FODMAPs Diet for Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Posted on by

Another good study on the low FODMAPs diet for irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea (IBS-D): S Eswaran et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15: 1890-9

This was a propspective, single-blind trial of 92 patients (84 completed study) with IBS-D (65 women) comparing the low FODMAPs diet to a modified diet recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for 4 weeks. Key findings:

  • The low FODMAPs group had larger increase in IBS-QOL score (15.0 vs 5.0).  In addition, based on IBS-QOL a meaningful clinical response occurred in 52% compared with 21% in the mNICE group.
  • Activity impairment was significantly reduced in the low FODMAPs group; -22.89 compared with -9.44.  Anxiety scores decreased as well.

My take: This study indicates that the low FODMAPs diet helps patient with IBS-D, and not just with their GI symptoms.

Related blog posts:

Cabin at Phantom Ranch, Grand Canyon

Mailbag for postcards (delivered via mule)

Phantom ranch canteen

Low FODMAP –Real World Experience

Posted on by

HM Staduacher et al. Gastroenterol October 2017; 153: 936–47

Key finding:

  • In this randomized, placebo-controlled study with 104 patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), the researchers spent only 10 minutes per patient teaching the low FODMAPs diet; yet 57% reported adequate relief of symptoms.

AGA Journals blog summary: Can a Diet Low in FODMAP Reduce IBS Symptoms in the Real World?

An excerpt:

Heidi Maria Staudacher et al aimed to investigate the effects of a diet low in FODMAPs compared with a sham diet in patients with IBS, and determine the effects of a probiotic on diet-induced alterations in the microbiota.

They performed a 2×2 factorial trial of 104 patients with IBS. Patients were either given counselling to follow a sham diet or diet low in FODMAPs for 4 weeks, but not the actual foods. Patients also received a placebo or multistrain probiotic formulation, resulting in 4 groups (27 receiving sham diet/placebo, 26 receiving sham diet/probiotic, 24 receiving low-FODMAP diet/placebo, and 27 receiving low-FODMAP diet/probiotic)…

In the per-protocol analysis, a significantly higher proportion of patients on the low-FODMAP diet had adequate symptom relief (61%) than in the sham diet group (39%).

The total mean IBS severity score was significantly lower for patients on the low-FODMAP diet (173 ± 95) than the sham diet (224 ± 89), but there was no significantly difference between patients given probiotic (207 ± 98) or placebo (192 ± 93).

Related blog posts: