Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39968993›Full record

ReviewArquivos de gastroenterologia2025

DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF SMALL INTESTINAL BACTERIAL OVERGROWTH: AN OFFICIAL POSITION PAPER FROM THE BRAZILIAN FEDERATION OF GASTROENTEROLOGY.

Bruno César da Silva, Gabriela Piovezani Ramos, Luisa Leite Barros, Ana Flávia Passos Ramos, Gerson Domingues, Décio Chinzon, Maria do Carmo Friche Passos

Abstract readReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Review in Arquivos de gastroenterologia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. The alleviating effects and mechanisms ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Bruno César da SilvaHospital da Bahia, Divisão de Gastroenterologia, Salvador, BA, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5433-8806
Gabriela Piovezani RamosFaculdade Evangélica Mackenzie do Paraná, Divisão de Gastroenterologia, Curitiba, PR, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4275-3866
Luisa Leite BarrosFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7782-2825
Ana Flávia Passos RamosSanta Casa de Belo Horizonte, Divisão de Gastroenterologia, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3852-1907
Gerson DominguesUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0431-451X
Décio ChinzonFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3030-6687
Maria do Carmo Friche PassosSanta Casa de Belo Horizonte, Divisão de Gastroenterologia, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5247-9477

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSmall intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) is a condition characterized by an abnormal increase in bacterial population in the small intestine, leading to symptoms such as bloating, abdominal pain, distension, diarrhea, and eventually malabsorption. The diagnosis and management of SIBO remain challenging due to overlapping symptoms with other gastrointestinal disorders such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), and coeliac disease.

objectiveThis article aims to review current evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of SIBO, with a focus on strategies suitable for the Brazilian healthcare system.

methodsA comprehensive literature review was performed, focusing on clinical guidelines, randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies concerning SIBO. Diagnostic methods, including breath tests and direct aspiration techniques, were critically analyzed. Treatment approaches, including antibiotics, dietary modifications, and probiotics, were reviewed. The recommendations were formulated based on a panel of gastroenterologists, members of the Brazilian Federation of Gastroenterology (FBG), with approval from the majority of the members.

resultsBreath tests using glucose and lactulose remain the most commonly used non-invasive diagnostic tools, though they are subject to limitations such as false positives and false negatives. Treatment with rifaximin is effective in most cases of SIBO, while systemic antibiotics like metronidazole and ciprofloxacin are alternatives. Probiotics and dietary interventions, particularly low FODMAP diets, can complement antibiotic therapy. Long-term follow-up is essential due to the recurrence rate, which is common in SIBO patients.

conclusionStandardizing SIBO diagnosis and treatment in Brazil is essential to reduce diagnostic delays and optimize care, especially given the disparities and heterogeneity in clinical practice across the country. This article provides evidence-based recommendations to guide clinical practice. Further research is needed to refine diagnostic methods, explore novel treatment strategies, and better understand the specific characteristics of the Brazilian population.

Indexed as

Blind Loop SyndromeIntestine, SmallAnti-Bacterial AgentsBrazilBreath TestsHumansAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID39968993
PMCPMC12043196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.