Cedric Van de Bruaene, Florencia Carbone, Karen Van den Houte, Esther Colomier, Karlien Raymenants, Bert Broeders, Lukas M Balsiger, Mike P Jones, Tim Vanuytsel, Jan Tack
{"title":"Navigating the Maze of Functional Dyspepsia: Emergence of a New Entity, Postprandial Epigastric Pain Syndrome.","authors":"Cedric Van de Bruaene, Florencia Carbone, Karen Van den Houte, Esther Colomier, Karlien Raymenants, Bert Broeders, Lukas M Balsiger, Mike P Jones, Tim Vanuytsel, Jan Tack","doi":"10.1016/j.cgh.2025.05.017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background & aims: </strong>The Rome IV criteria subdivide functional dyspepsia (FD) into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) with meal-related symptoms (early satiation and/or postprandial fullness) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) with meal-unrelated symptoms (epigastric pain and/or burning). We aimed to systematically assess the relationship of epigastric pain to meal ingestion in 4 independent FD databases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 1337 patients with FD were included. Three cohorts (local, national, and international; total n = 971) completed a Rome IV symptom questionnaire, with additional questions on meal relationships. In 498 patients undergoing a standard gastric emptying breath test, we analyzed the evolution of symptoms during a 4-hour window. Patients were categorized as postprandial epigastric pain (pEPS), meal-unrelated epigastric pain (murEPS), and PDS symptoms with/without postprandial epigastric pain. Symptom profiles and demographics were compared between these categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Distribution for Rome IV PDS, EPS, and overlap was 896, 252, and 186. Postprandial epigastric pain without PDS symptoms (ie, pEPS) was present in approximately 40% of patients with EPS, whereas 60% had murEPS. Fifty percent of patients with PDS reported postprandial epigastric pain. Patient demographics were similar across categories. Overall, patients with PDS and postprandial epigastric pain had the most associated gastrointestinal symptoms, compared with pEPS, murEPS, or PDS without postprandial epigastric pain.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In contrast to earlier characterization of EPS symptoms as purely meal-unrelated, we identified a relevant patient cohort with postprandial epigastric pain in the absence of PDS symptoms in 4 different cohorts. Further research is needed to determine the underlying pathophysiology and the response to different treatment approaches in these newly defined patient cohorts.</p>","PeriodicalId":10347,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2025.05.017","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background & aims: The Rome IV criteria subdivide functional dyspepsia (FD) into postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) with meal-related symptoms (early satiation and/or postprandial fullness) and epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) with meal-unrelated symptoms (epigastric pain and/or burning). We aimed to systematically assess the relationship of epigastric pain to meal ingestion in 4 independent FD databases.
Methods: In total, 1337 patients with FD were included. Three cohorts (local, national, and international; total n = 971) completed a Rome IV symptom questionnaire, with additional questions on meal relationships. In 498 patients undergoing a standard gastric emptying breath test, we analyzed the evolution of symptoms during a 4-hour window. Patients were categorized as postprandial epigastric pain (pEPS), meal-unrelated epigastric pain (murEPS), and PDS symptoms with/without postprandial epigastric pain. Symptom profiles and demographics were compared between these categories.
Results: Distribution for Rome IV PDS, EPS, and overlap was 896, 252, and 186. Postprandial epigastric pain without PDS symptoms (ie, pEPS) was present in approximately 40% of patients with EPS, whereas 60% had murEPS. Fifty percent of patients with PDS reported postprandial epigastric pain. Patient demographics were similar across categories. Overall, patients with PDS and postprandial epigastric pain had the most associated gastrointestinal symptoms, compared with pEPS, murEPS, or PDS without postprandial epigastric pain.
Conclusion: In contrast to earlier characterization of EPS symptoms as purely meal-unrelated, we identified a relevant patient cohort with postprandial epigastric pain in the absence of PDS symptoms in 4 different cohorts. Further research is needed to determine the underlying pathophysiology and the response to different treatment approaches in these newly defined patient cohorts.
背景和目的:Rome IV标准将功能性消化不良(FD)细分为伴有进餐相关症状(早期饱足和/或餐后饱腹)的餐后窘迫综合征(PDS)和伴有进餐无关症状(胃脘痛和/或灼烧感)的胃脘痛综合征(EPS)。我们的目的是在四个独立的FD数据库中系统地评估胃脘痛与进食的关系。方法:共纳入1337例FD患者。三个队列(本地、国家和国际,共n=971)完成了一份Rome IV症状问卷,并附加了关于膳食关系的问题。在498例接受标准胃排空呼吸试验的患者中,我们分析了4小时内症状的演变。患者分为餐后胃痛(pEPS)、与进餐无关的胃痛(murEPS)和伴有/不伴有餐后胃痛的PDS症状。比较这些类别之间的症状概况和人口统计学特征。结果:Rome IV PDS/EPS/重叠分布为896/252/186。约40%的EPS患者存在无PDS症状(即pEPS)的餐后胃脘痛,而60%的EPS患者有较重的pEPS。50%的PDS患者报告餐后胃脘痛。不同类别的患者人口统计数据相似。总体而言,与pEPS、murEPS或无餐后胃脘痛的PDS相比,有餐后胃脘痛的PDS患者有最多的相关胃肠道症状。结论:与早期将EPS症状定性为纯粹与饮食无关的特征相反,我们在4个不同的队列中确定了一个相关的患者队列,在没有PDS症状的情况下存在餐后胃脘痛。需要进一步的研究来确定潜在的病理生理学,以及在这些新定义的患者队列中对不同治疗方法的反应。
期刊介绍:
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (CGH) is dedicated to offering readers a comprehensive exploration of themes in clinical gastroenterology and hepatology. Encompassing diagnostic, endoscopic, interventional, and therapeutic advances, the journal covers areas such as cancer, inflammatory diseases, functional gastrointestinal disorders, nutrition, absorption, and secretion.
As a peer-reviewed publication, CGH features original articles and scholarly reviews, ensuring immediate relevance to the practice of gastroenterology and hepatology. Beyond peer-reviewed content, the journal includes invited key reviews and articles on endoscopy/practice-based technology, health-care policy, and practice management. Multimedia elements, including images, video abstracts, and podcasts, enhance the reader's experience. CGH remains actively engaged with its audience through updates and commentary shared via platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.