PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11879596

Functional (Nonulcer) Dyspepsia.

Abstract

Functional (nonulcer) dyspepsia refers to upper abdominal pain or discomfort with or without symptoms of early satiety, nausea, or vomiting with no definable organic cause. The current Rome II criteria help to diagnose functional dyspepsia and avoid misdiagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease and irritable bowel syndrome as functional dyspepsia. Assessment of gastric emptying with scintigraphy or breath testing may be useful in identifying delayed gastric emptying in patients with dyspeptic symptoms and may be helpful in patient management. Electrogastrography is a noninvasive test that evaluates for gastric dysrhythmias. Satiety testing is being evaluated as an indirect test for impaired fundic relaxation and visceral hypersensitivity. The symptom response to Helicobacter pylori therapy in patients with functional dyspepsia and a negative endoscopy examination but a positive H. pylori test is marginal. Lifestyle modifications often are suggested for initial treatment of functional dyspepsia. Dietary changes such as frequent small meals, low-fat diet, and avoidance of certain aggravating foods may improve symptoms. Additional measures include cessation of smoking, avoiding excess alcohol intake, and minimizing coffee intake. Antacids and over-the-counter histamine type 2 receptor antagonists may be helpful as an "on-demand" therapy for intermittent symptoms. They are safe and relatively inexpensive. Different subgroups of functional dyspepsia are based on the predominant symptom and may help in choosing an appropriate drug to initiate therapy. If the predominant symptom is epigastric pain (ulcer-like functional dyspepsia), histamine-2 receptor antagonists or proton pump inhibitors are the initial treatment of choice. If fullness, bloating, early satiety or nausea is the predominant complaint (dysmotility-like functional dyspepsia), a prokinetic agent may help. Metoclopramide is the only available effective prokinetic agent at present. If metoclopramide is used, short-term treatment and discussion of possible side effects with the patient are advised. If there is no response to these initial treatments, switching therapy from proton pump inhibitor to prokinetic or vice versa can be tried. If these treatment options fail, patient re-evaluation for other disorders (including other functional bowel disorders) is advised. A low-dose tricyclic antidepressant at bedtime may be helpful for treatment of visceral hypersensitivity.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kashyap V. Panganamamula, Robert S. Fisher, Henry P. Parkman. 2002. Functional (Nonulcer) Dyspepsia.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-002-0063-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗