Altayar, Osama

There is no universally available laboratory test to diagnose bile acid diarrhoea (BAD). Objective To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify a biomarker for idiopathic BAD in patients with functional bowel disorder (FBD) with diarrhoea. Design We searched multiple databases through 15 May 2015. Data were only available to estimate the diagnostic yield of each test (the prevalence of a positive test). Estimates were pooled across studies using the random effects model. Results We included 36 studies, enrolling 5028 patients (24 using 75 selenium homotaurocholic acid test ( 75 SeHCAT) retention of <10%, 6 using fasting serum C4, 3 using fasting serum fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19) and 2 based on total faecal bile acid (BA) excretion over 48 h). The diagnostic yields (and 95% CI) of abnormal tests were: 0.308 (0.247 to 0.377) for 75 SeHCAT retention (<10%), 0.171 (0.134 to 0.217) for serum C4, 0.248 (0.147 to 0.385) for serum FGF19 and 0.255 (0.071 to 0.606) for total faecal BA excretion over 48 h. The majority of the analyses were associated with substantial heterogeneity. Performance characteristics relative to a gold standard test could not be estimated. Conclusions Overall, the test with the highest diagnostic yield conducted in the largest number of studies was 75 SeHCAT retention, which is not widely available in many countries outside Europe and Canada. Using different diagnostic tests, 25% (average) of patients with lower FBD with diarrhoea has evidence of idiopathic BAD. These tests serve to identify idiopathic BAD among patients with FBD with diarrhoea. Further studies are required to appraise the performance characteristics of tests for idiopathic BAD.

Background. Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a poorly understood disease with few effective treatments. Psychosocial factors are believed to contribute to the pathogenesis of IBS.Objective. To evaluate the evidence for psychological therapies in IBS treatment.Methods. We searched six medical databases through February 6, 2014, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological therapies for the treatment of IBS. Two independent reviewers identified the RCTs, extracted the data, and assessed trial quality. We used the random-effect model to pool standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) across trials.Results. 15 RCTs that mostly evaluated cognitive behavioral therapy were included. Psychological therapies were associated with improvement in IBS symptoms severity scales (SMD −0.618; 95% CI: −0.853 to −0.383), IBS-Quality of Life (SMD 0.604; 95% CI: 0.440 to 0.768), and abdominal pain (SMD −0.282; 95% CI: −0.562 to −0.001). No statistically significant effect was observed on diarrhea or constipation.Limitations. The trials were at increased risk of bias and the overall sample size was small leading to imprecision.Conclusion. Psychological therapies may improve the quality of life and symptom severity in IBS. The effect size noted is moderate to large and is clinically meaningful.

AbstractContext:Exogenous dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) therapy has been proposed to replenish the depletion of endogenous DHEA and its sulfate form, which occurs with advancing age and is thought to be associated with loss of libido and menopausal symptoms.Objective:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence supporting the use of systemic DHEA in postmenopausal women with normal adrenal function.Methods:We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus through January 2014. Pairs of reviewers, working independently, selected studies and extracted data from eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We used the random-effects model to pool across studies and evaluated heterogeneity using the I2 statistic.Results:We included 23 RCTs with moderate to high risk of bias enrolling 1188 women. DHEA use was not associated with significant improvement in libido or sexual function (standardized mean difference, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, −0.02 to 0.73; P value = .06; I2 = 62%). There was also no significant effect of DHEA on serious adverse effects, serum lipids, serum glucose, weight, body mass index, or bone mineral density. This evidence warranted low confidence in the results, mostly due to imprecision, risk of bias, and inconsistency across RCTs.Conclusions:Evidence warranting low confidence suggests that DHEA administration does not significantly impact sexual symptoms or selected metabolic markers in postmenopausal women with normal adrenal function.