Sensitivity disturbances in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Although visceral hypersensitivity is a common feature among patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), studies on somatic sensitivity have given controversial results. AIM: To assess visceral sensitivity in response to isotonic rectal distensions and somatic sensitivity at different layers of the body wall (skin, subcutis, and muscle) in patients with IBS and fibromyalgia (FM), within and outside the area of abdominal pain referral. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 10 patients with IBS, 5 patients with FM, 9 patients with IBS+FM, and 9 healthy controls. Rectal distensions were performed by increasing tension at 4 g steps up to 64 g or discomfort. Pain thresholds to electrical stimulation were measured within and outside the areas of abdominal pain referral. RESULTS: Patients with IBS and IBS+FM demonstrated rectal hypersensitivity in comparison to controls. The threshold of discomfort was 44 +/- 5 g in IBS and 36 +/- 5 in IBS+FM patients, while patients with FM and healthy controls tolerated all distensions without discomfort. In the areas of pain referral, pain thresholds of all three tissues of the body wall were lower than normal in all patients groups (p < 0.001). In control areas, the pain thresholds were normal in skin, and lower than normal in subcutis and muscle in IBS (p < 0.001). FM and IBS+FM demonstrated somatic hypersensitivity at all sites (p < 0.001 vs healthy). CONCLUSION: Our observations seem to indicate that, although sharing a common hypersensitivity background, multiple mechanisms may modulate perceptual somatic and visceral responses in patients with IBS and FM.

Visceral sensitivity and symptoms in patients with constipation- or diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS): effect of a low-fat intraduodenal infusion.

BACKGROUND: Visceral hypersensitivity is common in Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) patients, and symptoms exacerbate postprandially. Yet the effects of nutrients on visceral sensitivity and symptoms in these patients have not been fully explored. AIMS: To evaluate the differences of visceral sensitivity and symptoms in healthy subjects and IBS patients during fasting and intraduodenal lipids infusion. METHODS: Graded rectal distensions at fixed tension levels were performed in 16 IBS patients (8 IBS-C and 8 IBS-D) and 6 healthy subjects before and during intraduodenal lipids infusion at 0.5 kcal/min. Tension levels were increased in 4 gr increments up to 64 gr or discomfort during both conditions. At each step, perception and symptoms were measured by means of a validated questionnaire. RESULTS: In basal conditions, perception thresholds in IBS patients and health were, respectively, 8 +/- 2 gr versus 32 +/- 9 gr (p < 0.001) with no changes during lipids. Intraduodenal lipids infusion significantly lowered threshold of discomfort in IBS patients in comparison to fasting (24 +/- 6 gr vs 34 +/- 4 gr; p < 0.05), while health tolerated all distension without discomfort. No differences of compliance, perception, or discomfort were observed between the two subgroups of patients at each tension step. The predominant symptom elicited in patients with IBS-C was abdominal pain (54%), while patients with IBS-D exhibited urgency (63%, p < 0.005); this pattern was maintained during lipids. CONCLUSIONS: Intraduodenal lipids increase visceral sensitivity in both IBS-C and IBS-D; symptoms specificity in response to rectal distension is maintained in the postprandial period. Lipids may be responsible for the postprandial symptoms exacerbation in IBS.