Small Bowel Bacterial Overgrowth is found in 71% of IBS patients and associated symptoms respond wel to Rifaximin in a phase IV trial

Background: The prevalence of small intestinal bowel bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) ranges from 43% to 78% as determined by the lactulose hydrogen breath (LHBT) test. Although rifaximine, a non-absorbable antibiotic, has been able to decrease global IBS symptoms as well as bloating in placebo-controlled randomized trials, these results were not repeated in phase IV studies in daily clinical practice. Aim: To assess the prevalence of SIBO in an IBS cohort and to evaluate the treatment response in the IBS cohort affected by SIBO. Methods: Enrolled patients were diagnosed with IBS using the following criteria: fulfillment of the Rome III criteria, absence of alarm symptoms (anemia, weight loss, nocturnal symptoms etc), normal fecal calproectin, normal endoscopic workup including histology. Celiac disease was excluded by serology and/or duodenal biopsy. All patients underwent lactulose hydrogen breath testing (LHBT) for SIBO diagnosis. Patients with SIBO were treated with rifaximine tablets (400mg twice daily for 14 days). Both before and at week 6 after rifaximin treatment, patients completed a questionnaire, where the following criteria were assessed individually using 11-point Likert scales: the bloating, flatulence, abdominal pain, diarrhea, and overall well-being. Results: Hundred-fifty IBS patients were enrolled (76% female, mean age 44 ± 16 years), of whom 106 (71%) were diagnosed with SIBO and consequently treated with rifaximine. Rifaximine treatment significantly reduced the following symptoms as assessed by the symptom questionnaire: bloating (5.5 ± 2.6 before vs. 3.6 ± 2.7 after treatment, p <0.001), flatulence (5 ± 2.7 vs. 4 ± 2.7, p = 0.015), diarrhea (2.9 ± 2.4 vs. 2 ± 2.4, p = 0.005), abdominal pain (4.8 ± 2.7 vs. 3.3 ± 2.5, p <0.001) and resulted in improved overall well-being (3.9 ± 2.4 vs. 2.7 ± 2.3, p <0.001). Thirteen of the 106 treated patients were lost to follow-up (12%). The LHBT was repeated 2-4 weeks after rifaximine treatment in 65/93 (70%) patients. Eradication of SIBO was documented in 85% of all patients (55/65), whereas 15% of patients (10/65) tested positive for SIBO as determined by the LHBT testing. Conclusions: The results of our phase IV trial indicate that a high proportion of IBS patients tested positive for SIBO. IBS symptoms (bloating, flatulence, diarrhea, pain, overall well-being) were significantly diminished following a 2-week treatment with rifaximine. These results support the previous findings of randomized controlled trials that the presence of SIBO is associated with symptom generation in IBS patients and that reduction and/or elimination of SIBO may help to alleviate IBSassociated symptoms.

Small bowel bacterial overgrowth is found in 71% of IBS patients and associated symptoms respond well to Rifaximin in a phase IV trial

Background a nd A ims: The prevalence of small intestinal bowel bacterial o vergrowth (SIBO) i n patients w ith irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) ranges from 43% to 78% as determined by t he lactulose hydrogen breath (LHBT) t est. Although rifaximine, a non-absorbable antibiotic, h as b een able to decrease I BS s ymptoms i n placebo-controlled r andomized trials, these results were not repeated in phase IV studies. We aimed to assess the prevalence of SIBO in an IBS cohort and to evaluate the response to rifaximin. Methods: I BS p atients f ulfilled Rome III criteria, had an absence of alarm symptoms, n ormal f ecal c alproectin, and normal e ndoscopic workup. They underwent lactulose hydrogen breath t esting (LHBT) for SIBO diagnosis. P atients with SIBO were t reated w ith rifaximine tablets f or 14 d ays. Symptoms were a ssessed by q uestionnaires before rifaximin treatment and at week 6. Results: Hundred-fifty IBS patients were enrolled (76% female, mean age 44 ± 16 years), of whom 106 (71%) were diagnosed with SIBO and consequently treated with rifaximine. Rifaximine treatment s ignificantly reduced the following symptoms as assessed by t he s ymptom q uestionnaire: bloating (5.5 ± 2.6 before vs. 3 .6 ± 2.7 after treatment, p <0.001), flatulence (5 ± 2.7 vs. 4 ± 2.7, p = 0.015), diarrhea (2.9 ± 2.4 vs. 2 ± 2.4, p = 0.005), abdominal pain (4.8 ± 2.7 vs. 3.3 ± 2.5, p <0.001) and resulted in improved overall well-being (3.9 ± 2.4 vs. 2.7 ± 2.3, p <0.001). The LHBT was repeated 2-4 weeks after rifaximine treatment in 6 5/93 (70%) patients. Eradication of SIBO was documented in 85% of all patients (55/65). Conclusions: The results o f our phase IV trial i ndicate that a high proportion of IBS p atients t ested positive f or SIBO. I BS symptoms w ere significantly diminished following a 2-week treatment with rifaximine.

Antibodies to flagellin indicate reactivity to bacterial antigens in IBS patients

One of the several possible causes of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is thought to be low-grade mucosal inflammation. Flagellin, the primary structural component of bacterial flagellae, was shown in inflammatory bowel disease patients to activate the innate and adaptive immunity. It has not yet been conclusively established if IBS patients show reactivity to luminal antigens. In 266 patients [112 IBS, 61 Crohn's disease (CD), 50 ulcerative colitis (UC) and 43 healthy controls (HC)], we measured antibodies to flagellin (FAB, types A4-Fla2 and Fla-X), anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae antibodies (ASCA) (both ELISA), antipancreas antibodies (PAB) and perinuclear antineutrophil cytoplasmatic antibodies (p-ANCA) (both IF). All IBS patients had normal fecal calprotectin (mean 21 microg mL(-1), SD 6.6) and fulfilled the ROME II criteria. Frequencies of antibodies in patients with IBS, CD, UC and HC, respectively, are as follows (in per cent): antibodies against A4-Fla2: 29/48/8/7; antibodies against Fla-X: 26/52/10/7; ASCA: 6/59/0/2; p-ANCA: 0/10/52/0; and PAB: 0/28/0/0. Antibodies against A4-Fla2 and Fla-X were significantly more frequent in IBS patients than in HC (P = 0.004 and P = 0.009). Antibodies to A4-Fla2 and Fla-X were significantly more frequent in IBS patients with antecedent gastroenteritis compared to non-postinfectious IBS patients (P = 0.002 and P = 0.012). In contrast to ASCA, PAB and p-ANCA, antibodies against A4-Fla2 and Fla-X were found significantly more often in IBS patients, particularly in those with postinfectious IBS, compared to HC. This observation supports the concept that immune reactivity to luminal antigens has a putative role in the development of IBS, at least in a subset of patients.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in U.S. adult travelers': The importance of travel to the development of IBS

Background. Irritable bowel syndrome is a gastrointestinal disorder that is potentially linked to international travel at an undetermined frequency.^ Methods. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed through mail to five hundred and ninety-one patients that were twice diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome at Kelsey Seybold Clinic in Houston, TX. Responses to survey questions were used to assess patient travel history, IBS symptomology, and disease classification.^ Results. Of the five hundred and ninety-one patients that were mailed a questionnaire, two hundred and twenty one patients returned questionnaires and two hundred and one met inclusion criteria. Of the participants reporting international travel within six months of developing their chronic intestinal disorder, 60% were classified as having PI-IBS, while 25% had IBS, 10% had PI-UFBD, and 5% had UFBD. A majority of the subjects who traveled six months before onset of their functional bowel disease had a post-infectious form of IBS and reported a start and worsening of symptoms with an acute bout of diarrhea. It was common for those traveling six months before travel and labeled PI-IBS to have enteric symptoms that led to lifestyle adjustments. ^ Conclusion. International travel had a significant effect on the classification of IBS among patients which relates to the differences in IBS symptoms and perhaps pathogenesis among travelers versus non-travelers. ^