-
American Family Physician Jun 2023Acute abdominal pain, defined as nontraumatic abdominal pain lasting fewer than seven days, is a common presenting concern with a broad differential diagnosis. The most...
Acute abdominal pain, defined as nontraumatic abdominal pain lasting fewer than seven days, is a common presenting concern with a broad differential diagnosis. The most common causes are gastroenteritis and nonspecific abdominal pain, followed by cholelithiasis, urolithiasis, diverticulitis, and appendicitis. Extra-abdominal causes such as respiratory infections and abdominal wall pain should be considered. Pain location, history, and examination findings help guide the workup after ensuring hemodynamic stability. Recommended tests may include a complete blood count, C-reactive protein, hepatobiliary markers, electrolytes, creatinine, glucose, urinalysis, lipase, and pregnancy testing. Several diagnoses, such as cholecystitis, appendicitis, and mesenteric ischemia, cannot be confirmed clinically and typically require imaging. Conditions such as urolithiasis and diverticulitis may be diagnosed clinically in certain cases. Imaging studies are chosen based on the location of pain and index of suspicion for specific etiologies. Computed tomography with intravenous contrast media is often chosen for generalized abdominal pain, left upper quadrant pain, and lower abdominal pain. Ultrasonography is the study of choice for right upper quadrant pain. Point-of-care ultrasonography can aid in the prompt diagnosis of several etiologies of acute abdominal pain, including cholelithiasis, urolithiasis, and appendicitis. In patients who have female reproductive organs, diagnoses such as ectopic pregnancy, pelvic inflammatory disease, and adnexal torsion should be considered. If ultrasonography results are inconclusive in pregnant patients, magnetic resonance imaging is preferred over computed tomography when available.
Topics: Pregnancy; Humans; Adult; Female; Appendicitis; Abdominal Pain; Abdomen, Acute; Ultrasonography; Diagnosis, Differential; Diverticulitis; Acute Disease; Cholelithiasis
PubMed: 37327158
DOI: No ID Found -
Nature Reviews. Disease Primers Nov 2020Paediatric functional abdominal pain disorders, currently referred to as disorders of gut-brain interaction, comprise irritable bowel syndrome, functional dyspepsia,... (Review)
Review
Paediatric functional abdominal pain disorders, currently referred to as disorders of gut-brain interaction, comprise irritable bowel syndrome, functional dyspepsia, abdominal migraine and functional abdominal pain not otherwise specified, as defined by the Rome IV diagnostic criteria. Functional abdominal pain disorders are common disorders with a prevalence of 3-16% depending on country, age and sex. A greater understanding of aetiopathogenesis and pathophysiology is emerging and includes intestinal components (inflammation, motility and the microbiota), central factors (psychological aspects, sensitization and/or differences in connectivity or activity of certain brain regions) as well as extrinsic factors (infections). In particular, the timing of disruption of the microbiota-gut-brain axis seems to be important. Diagnosis is challenging but is primarily based on clinical symptoms and exclusion of other organic causes, with an emphasis on avoiding unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures. The available pharmacological interventions are limited in children and, therefore, management has focused on combined approaches, including mind-targeted interventions (hypnotherapy and cognitive behavioural therapy), diet (probiotics) and percutaneous electrical nerve field stimulation. The evidence for their clinical efficacy, although limited, is favourable, with positive impacts on symptoms and overall quality of life. The coming decades hold promise for improved understanding and management of these enigmatic disorders.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Pediatrics
PubMed: 33154368
DOI: 10.1038/s41572-020-00222-5 -
Drugs Sep 2020Functional dyspepsia is a common functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorder of gastroduodenal origin, diagnosed clinically in the presence of prototypical symptoms of... (Review)
Review
Functional dyspepsia is a common functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorder of gastroduodenal origin, diagnosed clinically in the presence of prototypical symptoms of epigastric pain and meal-related symptoms, and without structural explanation. The most recent diagnostic criteria provide for two functional dyspepsia subtypes, epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) and post-prandial distress syndrome (PDS) based on the predominant symptom pattern. The evaluation of dyspepsia should keep laboratory, imaging, and invasive testing to a minimum, as extensive or repetitive investigations are of rather low diagnostic yield in the absence of localizing symptoms or alarm features. Factors with etiopathologic relationships to functional dyspepsia include micro-inflammation, GI infections, abnormalities of gastroduodenal motility, visceral hypersensitivity, disturbances along the brain-gut axis, and psychological factors; all of these causative mechanisms have potential to partially explain symptoms in some functional dyspepsia patients, thus providing a rationale for the efficacy of a diversity of therapeutic approaches to functional dyspepsia. Management of dyspepsia symptoms relies upon both pharmacologic treatments and non-pharmacologic approaches, including psychological and complementary interventions. The evidence in support of established functional dyspepsia therapies is reviewed, and forms the basis for an effective functional dyspepsia treatment strategy emphasizing the patient's current symptom severity, pattern, and impact on the function and quality of life of the individual.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Acupuncture Therapy; Combined Modality Therapy; Dyspepsia; Gastrointestinal Agents; Humans; Postprandial Period; Psychotherapy; Quality of Life; Syndrome; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32691294
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-020-01362-4 -
Digestive Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) 2022Abdominal pain is a common symptom of gastroenterology examination. Chronic abdominal pain is present for >3 months. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Abdominal pain is a common symptom of gastroenterology examination. Chronic abdominal pain is present for >3 months.
SUMMARY
Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common gastrointestinal diseases encountered by both gastroenterologists and general practitioners. GERD is usually a chronic disease presented with a set of symptoms including heartburn and/or regurgitation, and less commonly epigastric pain. Epigastric pain syndrome is characterized by the following symptoms: epigastric pain and/or burning. It does not necessarily occur after meal ingestion, may occur during fasting, and can be even improved by meal ingestion. Duodenal ulcers tend to cause abdominal pain that is localized in the epigastric region and commence several hours after eating, often at night. Hunger provokes pain in most of the cases and decreases after meal. Gastric ulcer pain occurs immediately after eating, and consuming food increases pain. Pain is localized in the epigastrium and can radiate to the back. Abdominal pain in irritable bowel syndrome is related to defecation. A typical symptom of chronic pancreatitis is pain that radiates to the back. In Crohn's disease, inflammation causes pain. Key Messages: Pain can occur at different locations with diverse intensity and propagation and is often associated with other symptoms. For any gastroenterologist, abdominal pain is a big challenge.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Dyspepsia; Gastroenterologists; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Heartburn; Humans
PubMed: 33946069
DOI: 10.1159/000516977 -
Acta Gastro-enterologica Belgica 2022We hereby describe a case of an acutely ill 41-year-old male without any medical history who presented with an acute abdomen in the emergency department. An abdominal CT...
We hereby describe a case of an acutely ill 41-year-old male without any medical history who presented with an acute abdomen in the emergency department. An abdominal CT showed a dissection of the coeliac trunk and infarction of the spleen. Because of a presumed diagnosis of vasculitis he was started on high dose IV steroids. However, after additional testing the diagnosis of segmental arteriolar Mediolysis (SAM) was made. In this case report we describe the presentation, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of this patient and provide the readers with background about common differential diagnosis and criteria for diagnosing SAM.
Topics: Male; Humans; Adult; Abdomen, Acute; Abdominal Pain; Abdomen; Vasculitis; Celiac Artery
PubMed: 35770291
DOI: 10.51821/85.4.9860 -
Digestive Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) 2021Background and Summary: Chronic abdominal pain is a challenging complaint for both primary care providers and gastroenterologists alike, due to a broad differential... (Review)
Review
Background and Summary: Chronic abdominal pain is a challenging complaint for both primary care providers and gastroenterologists alike, due to a broad differential diagnosis and sometimes extensive and negative workup. In the absence of red flag features that herald more acute conditions, the majority of patients with chronic abdominal pain have a benign cause or a functional disorder (e.g., irritable bowel syndrome). The costs associated with a diagnostic workup are an expensive burden to health care. A systematic approach for evaluating patients and initiating a management plan are recommended in the primary care setting. Undiagnosed abdominal pain should be investigated starting with a detailed history and physical examination. Diagnostic investigations should be limited and adapted according to the clinical features, the alarm symptoms, and the symptom severity. This review will focus on the diagnostic tools which general practitioners utilize in the evaluation of chronic abdominal pain. Key Messages: The primary role of the general practitioner is to differentiate an organic disease from a functional one, to refer to a specialist, or to provide treatment for the underlying cause of pain. The functional disorders should be considered after the organic pathology has been confidently excluded. Once a diagnosis of functional pain is established, repetitive testing is not recommended and the patient should be referred to receive psychological support (e.g., cognitive therapy) associated with available pharmacological therapeutic options.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Diagnosis, Differential; General Practice; Humans; Irritable Bowel Syndrome; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 33631744
DOI: 10.1159/000515433 -
JAAPA : Official Journal of the... Jan 2022Acute abdominal pain is a common complaint in children. The care of these patients is challenging for clinicians because presentation, diagnosis, and treatment are...
Acute abdominal pain is a common complaint in children. The care of these patients is challenging for clinicians because presentation, diagnosis, and treatment are different in children than adults. This article describes the presentation, physical examination, diagnosis, and treatment of common causes of acute abdominal pain in children and discusses emerging trends in diagnosis and treatment.
Topics: Abdomen, Acute; Abdominal Pain; Adult; Child; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Medical History Taking; Physical Examination
PubMed: 34908557
DOI: 10.1097/01.JAA.0000803624.08871.5f -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Crohn's disease is a remitting and relapsing disorder that can affect the whole gastrointestinal tract. Active disease symptoms include abdominal pain, fatigue, weight... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Crohn's disease is a remitting and relapsing disorder that can affect the whole gastrointestinal tract. Active disease symptoms include abdominal pain, fatigue, weight loss, and diarrhoea. There is no known cure; however, the disease can be managed, and therefore places a huge financial burden on healthcare systems. Abdominal pain is a common and debilitating symptom of Crohn's and other inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), and is multifaceted. Abdominal pain in Crohn's disease could be a symptom of disease relapse or related to medication adverse effects, surgical complications and strictures or adhesions secondary to IBD. In the absence of these factors, around 20 to 50% of people with Crohn's in remission still experience pain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of interventions for managing abdominal pain in people with Crohn's disease and IBD (where data on ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease could not be separated).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, three other databases, and clinical trials registries on 29 April 2021. We also searched the references of trials and systematic reviews for any additional trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All published, unpublished, and ongoing randomised trials that compared interventions for the management of abdominal pain in the setting of Crohn's disease and IBD, with other active interventions or standard therapy, placebo, or no therapy were included. We excluded studies that did not report on any abdominal pain outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Five review authors independently conducted data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment of the included studies. We analysed data using Review Manager 5. We expressed dichotomous and continuous outcomes as risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 studies (743 randomised participants). Five studies evaluated participants with Crohn's disease; seven studies evaluated participants with IBD where the data on ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease could not be separated; and two studies provided separate results for Crohn's disease participants. Studies considered a range of disease activity states. Two studies provided intervention success definitions, whilst the remaining studies measured pain as a continuous outcome on a rating scale. All studies except one measured pain intensity, whilst three studies measured pain frequency. Withdrawals due to adverse events were directly or indirectly reported in 10 studies. No conclusions could be drawn about the efficacy of the majority of the interventions on pain intensity, pain frequency, and treatment success, except for the comparison of transcranial direct current stimulation to sham stimulation. The certainty of the evidence was very low in all but one comparison because of imprecision due to sparse data and risk of bias assessed as unclear or high risk. Two studies compared a low FODMAP diet (n=37) to a sham diet (n=45) in IBD patients. The evidence on pain intensity was of very low certainty (MD -12.00, 95% CI -114.55 to 90.55). One study reported pain intensity separately for CD participants in the low FODMAP group [n=14, mean(SD)=24 (82.3)] and the sham group [n=12, mean(SD)=32 (69.3)]. The same study also reported pain frequency for IBD participants in the low FODMAP group [n=27, mean(SD)=36 (26)] and sham group [n=25, mean(SD)=38(25)] and CD participants in the low FODMAP group [n=14, mean(SD)=36 (138.4)] and sham group [n=12, mean(SD)=48 (128.2)]. Treatment success was not reported. One study compared a low FODMAP diet (n=25) to high FODMAP/normal diet (n=25) in IBD patients. The data reported on pain intensity was unclear. Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. One study compared medicine-separated moxibustion combined with acupuncture (n=51) versus wheat bran-separated moxibustion combined with shallow acupuncture (n=51) in CD patients. The data reported on pain intensity and frequency were unclear. Treatment success was not reported. One study compared mindfulness with CBT (n=33) versus no treatment (n=33) in IBD patients. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this treatment on pain intensity and frequency (MD -37.00, 95% CI -87.29 to 13.29). Treatment success was not reported. One study compared soft non-manipulative osteopathic treatment (n=16) with no treatment besides doctor advice (n=14) in CD patients. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this treatment on pain intensity (MD 0.01, 95% CI -1.81 to 1.83). Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. One study compared stress management (n=15) to self-directed stress management(n=15) and to standard treatment (n=15) in CD patients. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of these treatments on pain intensity (MD -30.50, 95% CI -58.45 to -2.55 and MD -34.30, 95% CI -61.99 to -6.61). Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. One study compared enteric-release glyceryl trinitrate (n=34) with placebo (n=36) in CD patients. The data reported on pain intensity was unclear. Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. One study compared 100 mg olorinab three times per day (n=8) with 25 mg olorinab three times per day (n=6) in CD patients. Pain intensity was measured as a 30% reduction in weekly average abdominal pain intensity score for the 100mg group (n=5) and the 25mg group (n=6). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this treatment on pain intensity (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.15). Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. One study compared relaxation training (n=28) to a waitlist (n=28) in IBD patients. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this treatment on pain intensity (MD -0.72, 95% CI -1.85 to 0.41). Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. One study compared web-based education (n=30) with a book-based education (n=30) in IBD patients. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this treatment on pain intensity (MD -0.13, 95% CI -1.25 to 0.99). Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. One study compared yoga (n=50) with no treatment (n=50) in IBD patients. The data reported on treatment success were unclear. Pain frequency and intensity were not reported. One study compared transcranial direct current stimulation (n = 10) to sham stimulation (n = 10) in IBD patients. There may be an improvement in pain intensity when transcranial direct current is compared to sham stimulation (MD -1.65, 95% CI -3.29 to -0.01, low-certainty evidence). Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. One study compared a kefir diet (Lactobacillus bacteria) to no intervention in IBD patients and provided separate data for their CD participants. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this treatment on pain intensity in IBD (MD 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.07) and CD (MD -1.10, 95% CI -1.67 to -0.53). Treatment success and pain frequency were not reported. Reporting of our secondary outcomes was inconsistent. The most adverse events were reported in the enteric-release glyceryl trinitrate and olorinab studies. In the enteric-release glyceryl trinitrate study, the adverse events were higher in the intervention arm. In the olorinab study, more adverse events were observed in the higher dose arm of the intervention. In the studies on non-drug interventions, adverse events tended to be very low or zero. However, no clear judgements regarding adverse events can be drawn for any interventions due to the low number of events. Anxiety and depression were measured and reported at the end of intervention in only one study; therefore, no meaningful conclusions can be drawn for this outcome.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found low certainty evidence that transcranial direct current stimulation may improve pain intensity compared to sham stimulation. We could not reach any conclusions on the efficacy of any other interventions on pain intensity, pain frequency, and treatment success. The certainty of the evidence was very low due to the low numbers of studies and participants in each comparison and clinical heterogeneity amongst the studies. While no serious or total adverse events were elicited explicitly with any of the treatments studied, the reported events were very low. The certainty of the evidence for all comparisons was very low, so no conclusions can be drawn.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Colitis, Ulcerative; Crohn Disease; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
PubMed: 34844288
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013531.pub2 -
JAMA Network Open Dec 2022Acupuncture is a promising therapy for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but the use of subjective scales as an assessment is accompanied by high placebo response rates. (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Acupuncture is a promising therapy for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but the use of subjective scales as an assessment is accompanied by high placebo response rates.
OBJECTIVES
To preliminarily test the feasibility of using US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended end points to evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture in the treatment of IBS.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This pilot, multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 4 tertiary hospitals in China from July 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021, and 14-week data collection was completed in March 2021. Individuals with a diagnosis of IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D) were randomized to 1 of 3 groups, including 2 acupuncture groups (specific acupoints [SA] and nonspecific acupoints [NSA]) and a sham acupuncture group (non-acupoints [NA]) with a 1:1:1 ratio.
INTERVENTIONS
Patients in all groups received twelve 30-minute sessions over 4 consecutive weeks at 3 sessions per week (ideally every other day).
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was the response rate at week 4, which was defined as the proportion of patients whose worst abdominal pain score (score range, 0-10, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating unbearable severe pain) decreased by at least 30% and the number of type 6 or 7 stool days decreased by 50% or greater.
RESULTS
Ninety patients (54 male [60.0%]; mean [SD] age, 34.5 [11.3] years) were enrolled, with 30 patients in each group. There were substantial improvements in the primary outcomes for all groups (composite response rates of 46.7% [95% CI, 28.8%-65.4%] in the SA group, 46.7% [95% CI, 28.8%-65.4%] in the NSA group, and 26.7% [95% CI, 13.0%-46.2%] in the NA group), although the difference between them was not statistically significant (P = .18). The response rates of adequate relief at week 4 were 64.3% (95% CI, 44.1%-80.7%) in the SA group, 62.1% (95% CI, 42.4%-78.7%) in the NSA group, and 55.2% (95% CI, 36.0%-73.0%) in the NA group (P = .76). Adverse events were reported in 2 patients (6.7%) in the SA group and 3 patients (10%) in NSA or NA group.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this pilot randomized clinical trial, acupuncture in both the SA and NSA groups showed clinically meaningful improvement in IBS-D symptoms, although there were no significant differences among the 3 groups. These findings suggest that acupuncture is feasible and safe; a larger, sufficiently powered trial is needed to accurately assess efficacy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000030670.
Topics: United States; Humans; Male; Adult; Irritable Bowel Syndrome; Pilot Projects; Acupuncture Therapy; Diarrhea; Abdominal Pain
PubMed: 36580333
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.48817 -
Digestion 2024Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common disorder characterized by chronic or recurrent upper abdominal pain or discomfort without any structural abnormalities in the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common disorder characterized by chronic or recurrent upper abdominal pain or discomfort without any structural abnormalities in the gastrointestinal tract. FD is categorized into two subgroups based on symptoms: postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) and epigastric pain syndrome.
SUMMARY
The pathophysiology of FD involves several mechanisms. Delayed gastric emptying is observed in approximately 30% of FD patients but does not correlate with symptom patterns or severity. Impaired gastric accommodation is important in the pathophysiology, particularly for PDS. Visceral hypersensitivity, characterized by heightened sensitivity to normal activities, contributes to the perception of discomfort or pain in FD. Alterations to the duodenal mucosa, including impaired mucosal barrier function and low-grade inflammation, are also implicated in the pathogenesis of FD. Microbial dysbiosis and psychological factors such as stress can further exacerbate symptoms. Treatment options include dietary modifications, establishing a physician-patient relationship, acid suppressants, prokinetics, neuromodulators, and behavioral therapies. Dietary recommendations include eating smaller, more frequent meals, and avoiding trigger foods. Acid suppressants are used as the first-line treatment. Prokinetics and neuromodulators aim to improve gastric motility and central pain processing, respectively. Behavioral therapies, including cognitive behavioral therapy and hypnotherapy, have shown benefits for refractory FD. Severe and refractory cases may require combination therapies or experimental treatments.
KEY MESSAGES
FD is a disorder of gut-brain interaction involving diverse pathophysiological mechanisms. Individualized treatment based on symptoms and responses to interventions is crucial. Further research is needed to improve the understanding of FD and advance the development of effective therapies.
Topics: Humans; Dyspepsia; Abdominal Pain; Stomach; Inflammation; Neurotransmitter Agents
PubMed: 37598673
DOI: 10.1159/000532082