Clinical Practice Guideline: irritable bowel syndrome with constipation and functional constipation in the adult

In this Clinical Practice Guideline we discuss the diagnostic and therapeutic approach of adult patients with constipation and abdominal complaints at the confluence of the irritable bowel syndrome spectrum and functional constipation. Both conditions are included among the functional bowel disorders, and have a significant personal, healthcare, and social impact, affecting the quality of life of the patients who suffer from them. The first one is the irritable bowel syndrome subtype, where constipation represents the predominant complaint, in association with recurrent abdominal pain, bloating, and abdominal distension. Constipation is characterized by difficulties with or low frequency of bowel movements, often accompanied by straining during defecation or a feeling of incomplete evacuation. Most cases have no underlying medical cause, and are therefore considered as a functional bowel disorder. There are many clinical and pathophysiological similarities between both disorders, and both respond similarly to commonly used drugs, their primary difference being the presence or absence of pain, albeit not in an "all or nothing" manner. Severity depends not only upon bowel symptom intensity but also upon other biopsychosocial factors (association of gastrointestinal and extraintestinal symptoms, grade of involvement, and perception and behavior variants). Functional bowel disorders are diagnosed using the Rome criteria. This Clinical Practice Guideline has been made consistent with the Rome IV criteria, which were published late in May 2016, and discuss alarm criteria, diagnostic tests, and referral criteria between Primary Care and gastroenterology settings. Furthermore, all the available treatment options (exercise, fluid ingestion, diet with soluble fiber-rich foods, fiber supplementation, other dietary components, osmotic or stimulating laxatives, probiotics, antibiotics, spasmolytics, peppermint essence, prucalopride, linaclotide, lubiprostone, biofeedback, antidepressants, psychological therapy, acupuncture, enemas, sacral root neurostimulation, surgery) are discussed, and practical recommendations are made regarding each of them.

Outcomes of a general hospital-based Home Parenteral Nutrition (HPN) program: report of our experience from a 26-year period

Background: Home parenteral nutrition (HPN) was introduced in Spain in the late 1980s. Our hospital was a pioneering medical centre in this field. Aim: Analyze outcomes of our HPN program. Methods: Retrospective study of patients receiving HPN between 1986-2012. Study variables are expressed as frequency, mean ± SD (range), median [interquartile range]. Parametrics, non-parametrics test and survival analysis (p < 0.05) were applied. Results: 91 patients (55 females and 36 males, mean age: 50.6 ± 5 yrs.) who received HPN for an accrual period of 55,470 days (median: 211 days [range: 63-573]) were included. The most prevalent underlying condition was cancer (49.5%), with the commonest HPN indication being short bowel syndrome (41.1%). The most frequently used catheter type was the tunneled catheter (70.7%). The complication rate was 3.58/1,000 HPN days (2.68, infection; 0.07, occlusion; 0.07 thrombosis; and 0.59, metabolic complications). Complications were consistently associated with both the underlying condition and HPN length. Infections were most frequent within the first 1,000 days of HPN. Liver disease incidence was related to HPN duration. HPN could be discontinued in 42.3% of patients. Ten-year survival rate was 42%, and varied across the underlying conditions. Conclusions: In the present series, the commonest reason for HPN was cancer. Our complication rate is in keeping with that reported in the literature. The overall survival rate was 42%, and varied across the underlying conditions.

Management of the clinical issue of constipation with abdominal complaints in adults: a national survey of Primary Care physicians and gastroenterologists

Irritable bowel syndrome and functional constipation represent a relevant and common health issue. However, real-world clinical practice includes patients with constipation who may or may not have other abdominal complaints (pain, bloating, abdominal discomfort) with variable frequency. The goal of the present study was to obtain information on the workload entailed by patients with constipation and associated abdominal complaints, predominant clinical behaviors, education needs, and potential daily practice aids both in Primary Care and gastroenterology settings. The clinical behavior of doctors is generally similar at both levels, despite differences in healthcare approach: use of empiric therapies and clinically guided diagnostic tests, with some differences in colonoscopy use (not always directly accessible from Primary Care). Regarding perceptions, general support and osmotic laxatives are most valued by PC doctors, whereas osmotic laxatives, combined laxatives, and linaclotide are most valued by GE specialists. Furthermore, over half of respondents considered differentiating both diagnoses as challenging. Finally, considerable education needs are self-acknowledged at both levels, as is a demand for guidelines and protocols to help in managing this issue in clinical practice. A strength of this study is its providing a joint photograph of the medical approach and the perceptions of constipation with abdominal discomfort from a medical standpoint. Weaknesses include self-declaration (no formal validation) and a response rate potentially biased by professional motivation.