Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27958284›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of gastroenterology2017

Pathophysiological Abnormalities in Functional Dyspepsia Subgroups According to the Rome III Criteria.

H Vanheel, F Carbone, L Valvekens, M Simren, H Tornblom, T Vanuytsel, L Van Oudenhove, J Tack

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
11.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

78 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 166 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Non-Chinese herbal medicines for functional dyspepsia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Guideline
  9. Guideline
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H VanheelTARGID, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
F CarboneTARGID, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
L ValvekensTARGID, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
M SimrenTARGID, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
H TornblomTARGID, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
T VanuytselTARGID, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
L Van OudenhoveTARGID, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
J TackTARGID, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe Rome III criteria proposed to subdivide functional dyspepsia (FD) into a postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) group, characterized by the presence of postprandial fullness and/or early satiety, and an epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) group, characterized by the presence of epigastric pain and/or epigastric burning. It has been suggested that different pathophysiological mechanisms underlie the symptom presentations in these subgroups that might determine treatment choices. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of gastric sensorimotor dysfunction in the PDS, EPS, and overlap groups and to evaluate potential differential associations with dyspeptic symptom scores.

methodsConsecutive FD patients fulfilling Rome III criteria were recruited and they scored frequency of dyspeptic symptoms (postprandial fullness, early satiety, nausea, bloating, epigastric pain, and epigastric burning) over the past 3 months (0-5; 1=once a month or less, 2=two or three times a month, 3=once a week, 4=several times a week, 5=every day). The cumulative symptom score was calculated by adding up the score of these dyspeptic symptoms. Based on these symptom scores, the patients were subdivided into subgroups according to the Rome III consensus: (i) PDS, characterized by postprandial fullness and/or early satiety at least several times a week, (ii) EPS, characterized by epigastric pain and/or epigastric burning at least once a week, and (iii) overlap, fulfilling the criteria for both PDS and EPS. Gastric sensitivity and gastric accommodation were measured using barostat testing, and solid gastric emptying was determined using the [

resultsA total of 560 FD patients (165 men, age 41.8±0.7 years) were classified into PDS (n=131), EPS (n=50), and overlap (n=379) groups. The prevalence of gastric hypersensitivity, impaired gastric accommodation, and delayed gastric emptying were 37%, 37%, and 23%, respectively, without any differential distribution in Rome III subgroups (P=0.16, P=0.27, and P=0.39 respectively). Comparing the physiological parameters for these gastric sensorimotor functions, there was only a significant difference in the gastric half emptying time between subgroups, with the overlap group having a higher t

conclusionsExcept for gastric emptying in the overlap group, FD subgroups as defined by the Rome III criteria are not differentially associated with putative pathophysiological mechanisms. These observations question the utility of this classification for guiding therapeutic choices in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Abdominal PainAdultBreath TestsCaprylatesCarbon RadioisotopesDyspepsiaFemaleGastric EmptyingHumansMaleNauseaPostprandial PeriodStomachCaprylatesCarbon Radioisotopesoctanoic acid

Identifiers

PMID27958284
OpenAlexW2561280188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.