RESUMEN
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1078315.].
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common disease which in the majority of patients is treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPI). However, up to 45% of the patients remain symptomatic on a standard dose of PPI. This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of an add-on therapy with the gel-forming chewable tablet Sobrade® in patients unsatisfied with PPI treatment. The bioadhesive gel covers the oesophagus and thereby protects the mucosa from reflux events. METHODS: 47 patients with symptomatic GERD despite PPI treatment participated in this study. The gel-forming tablets were taken up to four times daily after meals and prior to bedtime. Severity and frequency of GERD symptoms were evaluated during two onsite visits prior and following 14 days of treatment and used to calculate the GERD score of the Reflux Disease Questionnaire. Furthermore, patients recorded symptoms as well as onset and duration of symptoms relief daily in their electronic dairies. Effectiveness of treatment was analysed using non-parametric paired Wilcoxon test. In addition, anchor-based minimal important differences (MID) were assessed. RESULTS: Treatment resulted in significant reduction of GERD symptoms. Severity and frequency of 8 of the 9 assessed symptoms improved significantly during the treatment phase whereby most pronounced improvement was observed for heartburn. In agreement, all three subscales of the GERD score improved significantly. MID results suggest that patients considered a mean improvement of symptoms > 30% of initial severity as beneficial. Self-assessments by patients revealed first significant improvements of symptoms like heartburn and regurgitation from day 5 of treatment onwards. 49% of patients reported relief of symptoms within 15 min which lasted on average for 3.5 h. During the study no treatment emergent adverse events were reported and in 98% of all cases tolerability of the product was rated as very good or good. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed a pronounced improvement of the symptoms after add-on treatment with the gel-forming medical device. The very good safety and tolerability profile indicate an advantageous risk-benefit ratio. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This non-interventional study was prospectively positively evaluated by the responsible ethic-committees.
Asunto(s)
Reflujo Gastroesofágico , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/efectos adversos , Ácido Hialurónico/efectos adversos , Pirosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Pirosis/etiología , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/tratamiento farmacológico , ComprimidosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (SUDD) is often difficult to treat and guidelines only provide few evidence-based treatment options. METHOD: For the German-wide survey, a questionnaire was sent to 13790 physicians. It contained questions concerning the status of medical care for patients with diverticula and queried their individual option in regards to current treatment options and challenges for the daily medical routine. RESULTS: In total, 526 questionnaires were sent back for analysis. The biggest challenge for doctors handling patients with chronic diverticular disease (SUDD) is to make the correct diagnosis (17%) and the distinction to the irritable bowel syndrome (22%). Despite the high abundance of SUDD pathology, only 6% of the medical practitioners feel themselves sufficiently informed about it. The support for general practitioners by medical specialists (gastroenterologists) is limited: In the case of a SUDD or a diverticulitis diagnosis, the physicians sometimes receive an acute therapy plan (27%), but rarely get recommendations for diverticulitis pre- and post-care (11% and 18%), or assisting information for patient education (4%). For primary prophylaxis for persons with asymptomatic diverticula, practitioners give nutrition (41%) and life style (37%) recommendations, as well as probiotics (18%). After an acute diverticulitis, 42% recommend life style and nutrition modifications and 26% the intake of probiotics. For the treatment of SUDD symptoms, they advise mostly life style and nutrition modifications (45%) and probiotics (30%). About 60% of the doctors are satisfied with the efficacy of probiotics. Another 15% stated that they have not yet used them to treat SUDD. The main reasons for it seem to be the lack of reimbursability for probiotics (31%), the poor adherence of patients to therapy (20%) due to the slow onset of positive effects, and the difficulty of finding an evidence-based probiotic (16%). CONCLUSION: In the daily medical routine the correct diagnosing of SUDD is a major challenge and supporting information by medical specialist is scarce. Physicians frequently choose life style and nutrition recommendations and the use of probiotics as treatment options. The majority of the general practitioners is thereby satisfied with the efficacy of probiotics for patients with chronic diverticular disease, even though the choice of an evidence-based probiotic is an obstacle.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Diverticulares , Diverticulitis , Divertículo , Médicos Generales , Probióticos , Humanos , Enfermedades Diverticulares/diagnóstico , Enfermedades Diverticulares/tratamiento farmacológico , Probióticos/uso terapéutico , Diverticulitis/complicaciones , Divertículo/complicaciones , Atención Primaria de SaludAsunto(s)
Disentería , Diarrea/etiología , Diarrea/terapia , Disentería/diagnóstico , Disentería/terapia , HumanosRESUMEN
Even after decades of research and pharmaceutical development, cancer is still one of the most common causes of death in the western population and the management of cancer will remain a major challenge of medical research. One of the most common types of cancer is colorectal cancer (CRC). Prevention by detection of early-stage precursors is the most reliable method to prevent CRC development. In dependence of age, familial predisposition, and other risk factors the preventative routine screening for CRC by colonoscopy should be performed at least twice in intervals of about ten years. Although colonoscopy is a life-saving clinical examination reducing both incidence and mortality of CRC significantly, it has still a bad reputation in the population as an uncomfortable procedure with unpleasant side effects lasting sometimes over days to weeks. These effects are most likely caused by the bowel preparation before colonoscopy, which is crucial for a successful colonoscopy with high quality. Beside pain, bleeding and other rare but severe complications of colonoscopy, cleaning of the intestinal mucosa alters the gut microbiome significantly and consistently. Abdominal pain, cramps, diarrhea, nausea, bloating, and constipation are common adverse events which can continue to affect patients for days or even weeks after the procedure. In this multicenter, placebo controlled, double blind clinical trial, we investigated the effect of an intervention with a multispecies probiotic formulation for 30 days on the adverse events due to bowel preparation. We show that the treatment of participants with the multispecies probiotic formulation decreases the number of days with constipation significantly, and reduced pain, bloating, diarrhea, and general discomfort. 16S based amplicon analyses reveal recovery of administered probiotic strains from stool samples and differences in alpha diversity dynamics with higher variability in the probiotic group compared to the placebo group. In conclusion, the probiotic ameliorates the side effects after colonoscopy and might be an important supplement to increase acceptance of this life-saving preventative examination. Further, we present here for the first time that probiotic intervention of only 30 days affects alpha diversity parameters in stool samples.
RESUMEN
Bile acid diarrhea is one of the most frequently undiagnosed causes of chronic diarrhea. A variety of different pathophysiologic causes can underlie chronic diarrhea. Even after exclusion of the more frequent causes, up to 5â% of the population remains affected by unexplained chronic diarrhea. In up to 50â% within this cohort, bile acid diarrhea is the underlying cause.The various pathophysiologies leading to bile acid diarrhea are well characterized. In this way, bile acid diarrhea can be divided into primary, secondary and tertiary subtypes. Common to all causes is the increased amount of bile acids in the colon and in the faeces and the resulting secretory-osmotic diarrhea, in more severe forms in combination with steatorrhea. The diagnosis of bile acid diarrhea follows a clear algorithm which, in addition to the search for the cause and possibly a therapeutic trial, recognizes the 75SeHCAT test as the reference method for the detection of an increased loss of bile acids. In view of the chronic nature of the symptoms and the need for permanent, lifelong therapy, the use of a one-time, reliable diagnostic test is justified, though the test is currently only available at a few centers. In addition to the treatment of identifiable underlying diseases, the current treatment includes the use of drugs that bind bile acids, with additional nutritional recommendations and vitamin substitutions.The present review article summarizes the pathophysiology and importance of bile acid diarrhea and discusses the current approach towards diagnosis and treatment.