Ruepert Lisa, Quartero A Otto, de Wit Niek J, van der Heijden Geert J, Rubin Gregory, Muris Jean Wm
University Medical Center Utrecht, P.O. Box 85060, 3508 AB Utrecht, Netherlands.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Aug 10;2011(8):CD003460. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003460.pub3.
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common chronic gastrointestinal disorder. The role of pharmacotherapy for IBS is limited and focused mainly on symptom control.
The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of bulking agents, antispasmodics and antidepressants for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome.
Computer assisted structured searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane library, CINAHL and PsychInfo were conducted for the years 1966-2009. An updated search in April 2011 identified 10 studies which will be considered for inclusion in a future update of this review.
Randomized controlled trials comparing bulking agents, antispasmodics or antidepressants with a placebo treatment in patients with irritable bowel syndrome aged over 12 years were considered for inclusion. Only studies published as full papers were included. Studies were not excluded on the basis of language. The primary outcome had to include improvement of abdominal pain, global assessment or symptom score.
Two authors independently extracted data from the selected studies. Risk Ratios (RR) and Standardized Mean Differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. A proof of practice analysis was conducted including sub-group analyses for different types of bulking agents, spasmolytic agents or antidepressant medication. This was followed by a proof of principle analysis where only the studies with adequate allocation concealment were included.
A total of 56 studies (3725 patients) were included in this review. These included 12 studies of bulking agents (621 patients), 29 of antispasmodics (2333 patients), and 15 of antidepressants (922 patients). The risk of bias was low for most items. However, selection bias is unclear for many of the included studies because the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment were not described. No beneficial effect for bulking agents over placebo was found for improvement of abdominal pain (4 studies; 186 patients; SMD 0.03; 95% CI -0.34 to 0.40; P = 0.87), global assessment (11 studies; 565 patients; RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.33; P = 0.32) or symptom score (3 studies; 126 patients SMD -0.00; 95% CI -0.43 to 0.43; P = 1.00). Subgroup analyses for insoluble and soluble fibres also showed no statistically significant benefit. Separate analysis of the studies with adequate concealment of allocation did not change these results. There was a beneficial effect for antispasmodics over placebo for improvement of abdominal pain (58% of antispasmodic patients improved compared to 46% of placebo; 13 studies; 1392 patients; RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.55; P < 0.001; NNT = 7), global assessment (57% of antispasmodic patients improved compared to 39% of placebo; 22 studies; 1983 patients; RR 1.49; 95% CI 1.25 to 1.77; P < 0.0001; NNT = 5) and symptom score (37% of antispasmodic patients improved compared to 22% of placebo; 4 studies; 586 patients; RR 1.86; 95% CI 1.26 to 2.76; P < 0.01; NNT = 3). Subgroup analyses for different types of antispasmodics found statistically significant benefits for cimteropium/ dicyclomine, peppermint oil, pinaverium and trimebutine. Separate analysis of the studies with adequate allocation concealment found a significant benefit for improvement of abdominal pain. There was a beneficial effect for antidepressants over placebo for improvement of abdominal pain (54% of antidepressants patients improved compared to 37% of placebo; 8 studies; 517 patients; RR 1.49; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.12; P = 0.03; NNT = 5), global assessment (59% of antidepressants patients improved compared to 39% of placebo; 11 studies; 750 patients; RR 1.57; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.00; P < 0.001; NNT = 4) and symptom score (53% of antidepressants patients improved compared to 26% of placebo; 3 studies; 159 patients; RR 1.99; 95% CI 1.32 to 2.99; P = 0.001; NNT = 4). Subgroup analyses showed a statistically significant benefit for selective serotonin releasing inhibitors (SSRIs) for improvement of global assessment and for tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) for improvement of abdominal pain and symptom score. Separate analysis of studies with adequate allocation concealment found a significant benefit for improvement of symptom score and global assessment. Adverse events were not assessed as an outcome in this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that bulking agents are effective for treating IBS. There is evidence that antispasmodics are effective for the treatment of IBS. The individual subgroups which are effective include: cimetropium/dicyclomine, peppermint oil, pinaverium and trimebutine. There is good evidence that antidepressants are effective for the treatment of IBS. The subgroup analyses for SSRIs and TCAs are unequivocal and their effectiveness may depend on the individual patient. Future research should use rigorous methodology and valid outcome measures.
肠易激综合征(IBS)是一种常见的慢性胃肠道疾病。药物治疗对IBS的作用有限,主要集中在症状控制方面。
本系统评价的目的是评估容积性泻剂、抗痉挛药和抗抑郁药治疗肠易激综合征的疗效。
对1966年至2009年期间的MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、CINAHL和PsychInfo进行计算机辅助结构化检索。2011年4月的更新检索确定了10项研究,这些研究将被纳入本综述的未来更新版本中。
纳入比较容积性泻剂、抗痉挛药或抗抑郁药与安慰剂治疗12岁以上肠易激综合征患者的随机对照试验。仅纳入发表为全文的研究。研究不根据语言排除。主要结局必须包括腹痛改善、整体评估或症状评分。
两位作者独立从所选研究中提取数据。计算风险比(RR)和标准化均数差(SMD)及95%置信区间(CI)。进行了实践验证分析,包括对不同类型容积性泻剂、解痉剂或抗抑郁药物的亚组分析。随后进行了原则验证分析,其中仅纳入了分配隐藏充分的研究。
本综述共纳入56项研究(3725例患者)。其中包括12项容积性泻剂研究(621例患者)、29项抗痉挛药研究(2333例患者)和15项抗抑郁药研究(922例患者)。大多数项目的偏倚风险较低。然而,许多纳入研究的选择偏倚尚不清楚,因为未描述随机化和分配隐藏所用的方法。未发现容积性泻剂在改善腹痛(4项研究;186例患者;SMD 0.03;95%CI -0.34至0.40;P = 0.87)、整体评估(11项研究;5,65例患者;RR 1.10;95%CI 0.91至1.33;P = 0.32)或症状评分(3项研究;126例患者;SMD -0.00;95%CI -0.43至0.43;P = 1.00)方面比安慰剂有有益效果。不溶性和可溶性纤维的亚组分析也未显示出统计学上的显著益处。对分配隐藏充分的研究进行单独分析并未改变这些结果。抗痉挛药在改善腹痛方面比安慰剂有有益效果(58%的抗痉挛药患者改善,而安慰剂组为46%;13项研究;1392例患者;RR 1.32;95%CI 1.12至1.55;P < 0.001;NNT = 7)、整体评估(57%的抗痉挛药患者改善,而安慰剂组为39%;22项研究;1983例患者;RR 1.49;95%CI 1.25至1.77;P < 0.0001;NNT = 5)和症状评分(37%的抗痉挛药患者改善,而安慰剂组为22%;4项研究;586例患者;RR 1.86;95%CI 1.26至2.76;P < 0.01;NNT = 3)。不同类型抗痉挛药的亚组分析发现,西托溴铵/双环维林、薄荷油、匹维溴铵和曲美布汀有统计学上的显著益处。对分配隐藏充分的研究进行单独分析发现,在改善腹痛方面有显著益处。抗抑郁药在改善腹痛方面比安慰剂有有益效果(54%的抗抑郁药患者改善,而安慰剂组为37%;8项研究;517例患者;RR 1.49;95%CI 1.05至2.12;P = 0.03;NNT = 5)、整体评估(59%的抗抑郁药患者改善,而安慰剂组为39%;11项研究;750例患者;RR 1.57;95%CI 1.23至2.00;P < 0.001;NNT = 4)和症状评分(53%的抗抑郁药患者改善,而安慰剂组为26%;3项研究;159例患者;RR 1.99;95%CI 1.32至2.99;P = 0.001;NNT = 4)。亚组分析显示,选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRI)在改善整体评估方面有统计学上的显著益处,三环类抗抑郁药(TCA)在改善腹痛和症状评分方面有显著益处。对分配隐藏充分的研究进行单独分析发现,在改善症状评分和整体评估方面有显著益处。本综述未将不良事件作为结局进行评估。
没有证据表明容积性泻剂对治疗IBS有效。有证据表明抗痉挛药对IBS治疗有效。有效的个体亚组包括:西托溴铵/双环维林、薄荷油、匹维溴铵和曲美布汀。有充分证据表明抗抑郁药对IBS治疗有效。SSRI和TCA的亚组分析结果明确,其有效性可能取决于个体患者。未来的研究应采用严谨的方法和有效的结局指标。