No abstract

INTRODUCTION: The North American Consensus guidelines for glucose breath testing (GBT) for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) incorporated changes in glucose dosing and diagnostic cutoffs. We compared GBT positivity based on hydrogen and methane excretion and quantified symptoms during performance of the North American vs older modified Rome Consensus protocols. Methods: GBT was performed using the North American protocol (75 g glucose, cutoffs >20 parts per million [ppm] hydrogen increase after glucose and >10 ppm methane anytime) in 3,102 patients vs modified Rome protocol (50 g glucose, >12 ppm hydrogen and methane increases after glucose) in 3,193 patients with suspected SIBO. Results: Positive GBT were more common with the North American vs modified Rome protocol (39.5% vs 29.7%, P < 0.001). Overall percentages with GBT positivity using methane criteria were greater and hydrogen criteria lower with the North American protocol (P < 0.001). Peak methane levels were higher for the North American protocol (P < 0.001). Times to peak hydrogen and methane production were not different between protocols. With the North American protocol, gastrointestinal and extraintestinal symptoms were more prevalent after glucose with both positive and negative GBT (P < 0.04) and greater numbers of symptoms (P < 0.001) were reported. DISCUSSION: GBT performed using the North American Consensus protocol was more often positive for SIBO vs the modified Rome protocol because of more prevalent positive methane excretion. Symptoms during testing were greater with the North American protocol. Implications of these observations on determining breath test positivity and antibiotic decisions for SIBO await future prospective testing.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of opioids on anorectal function is poorly understood but potentially relevant to the pathogenesis of opioid-induced constipation (OIC). To evaluate anorectal function testing (AFT) characteristics, symptom burden, and quality of life in chronically constipated patients prescribed an opioid (OIC) in comparison with constipated patients who are not on an opioid (NOIC). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on 3,452 (OIC = 588 and NOIC = 2,864) chronically constipated patients (Rome 3) who completed AFT. AFT variables included anal sphincter pressure and response during simulated defecation, balloon expulsion test (BET), and rectal sensation. Dyssynergic defecation (DD) was defined as an inability to relax the anal sphincter during simulated defecation and an abnormal BET. Patients completed Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM) and Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) questionnaires. RESULTS: The mean age of the study cohort was 49 years. Most patients were women (82%) and whites (83%). Patients with OIC were older than NOIC patients (50.7 vs 48.3, P = 0.001). OIC patients were significantly more likely to have DD (28.6% vs 21.4%, P < 0.001), an abnormal simulated defecation response on anorectal manometry (59% vs 43.8%, P < 0.001), and an abnormal BET (48% vs 42.5%, P = 0.02) than NOIC patients. OIC patients reported more severe constipation symptoms (P < 0.02) and worse quality of life (P < 0.05) than NOIC patients. DISCUSSION: Chronically constipated patients who use opioids are more likely to have DD and more severe constipation symptoms than NOIC.

No abstract

No abstract