Qasim Aziz

Guidelines on the irritable bowel syndrome: mechanisms and practical management

Background: IBS affects 5–11% of the population of most countries. Prevalence peaks in the third and fourth decades, with a female predominance. Aim: To provide a guide for the assessment and management of adult patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Methods: Members of the Clinical Services Committee of The British Society of Gastroenterology were allocated particular areas to produce review documents. Literature searching included systematic searches using electronic databases such as Pubmed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases and extensive personal reference databases. Results: Patients can usefully be classified by predominant bowel habit. Few investigations are needed except when diarrhoea is a prominent feature. Alarm features may warrant further investigation. Adverse psychological features and somatisation are often present. Ascertaining the patients’ concerns and explaining symptoms in simple terms improves outcome. IBS is a heterogeneous condition with a range of treatments, each of which benefits a small proportion of patients. Treatment of associated anxiety and depression often improves bowel and other symptoms. Randomised placebo controlled trials show benefit as follows: cognitive behavioural therapy and psychodynamic interpersonal therapy improve coping; hypnotherapy benefits global symptoms in otherwise refractory patients; antispasmodics and tricyclic antidepressants improve pain; ispaghula improves pain and bowel habit; 5-HT3 antagonists improve global symptoms, diarrhoea, and pain but may rarely cause unexplained colitis; 5-HT4 agonists improve global symptoms, constipation, and bloating; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors improve global symptoms. Conclusions: Better ways of identifying which patients will respond to specific treatments are urgently needed.

Long-term reorganization of human motor cortex driven by short-term sensory stimulation

Removal of sensory input can induce changes in cortical motor representation that reverse when sensation is restored. Here we ask whether manipulation of sensory input can induce long-term reorganization in human motor cortex that outlasts the initial conditioning. We report that for at least 30 minutes after pharyngeal stimulation, motor cortex excitability and area of representation for the pharynx increased, while esophagus representation decreased, without parallel changes in the excitability of brainstem-mediated reflexes. Therefore increased sensory input can drive long-term cross-system changes in motor areas of the cerebral cortex, which suggests that sensory stimulation might rehabilitate dysphagia, a frequent consequence of cerebral injury.

The cortical topography of human swallowing musculature in health and disease

Because no detailed information exists regarding the topographic representation of swallowing musculature on the human cerebral cortex in health or disease, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation to study the cortical topography of human oral, pharyngeal and esophageal musculature in 20 healthy individuals and the topography of pharyngeal musculature in two stroke patients, one with and one without dysphagia. Our results demonstrate that swallowing musculature is discretely and somatotopically represented on the motor and premotor cortex of both hemispheres but displays interhemispheric asymmetry, independent of handedness. Following stroke, dysphagia appeared to be associated with smaller pharyngeal representation on the intact hemisphere, which increases in size with recovery of swallowing.

Contribution of central sensitisation to the development of noncardiac chest pain

BACKGROUND Non-cardiac chest pain mimics angina pectoris but generally originates from the oesophagus. Visceral hypersensitivity may contribute, but its neurophysiological basis is unclear. We investigated whether central sensitisation, an activity-dependent amplification of sensory transfer in the central nervous system, underlies visceral pain hypersensitivity and non-cardiac chest pain. METHODS We studied 19 healthy volunteers and seven patients with non-cardiac chest pain. Acid was infused into the lower oesophagus. Sensory responses to electrical stimulation were monitored within the acid-exposed lower oesophagus, the non-exposed upper oesophagus, and the cutaneous area of pain referral, before and after the infusion. FINDINGS In healthy volunteers, acid infusion into the lower oesophagus lowered the pain threshold in the upper oesophagus (mean decrease 18.2% [95% CI 10.4 to 26.0]; p=0.01) and on the chest wall (24.5% [10.2 to 38.7]; p=0.01). Patients with non-cardiac chest pain had a lower resting oesophageal pain threshold than healthy controls (45 [30 to 58] vs 64 [49 to 81] mA; p=0.04). In response to acid infusion, their pain threshold in the upper oesophagus fell further and for longer (mean fall in area under threshold/time curve 26.7 [11.0 to 42.3] vs 5.8 [2.8 to 8.8] units; p=0.04). INTERPRETATION The finding of secondary viscerovisceral and viscerosomatic pain hypersensitivity suggests that central sensitisation may contribute to visceral pain disorders. The prolonged visceral pain hypersensitivity in patients with non-cardiac chest pain suggests a central enhancement of sensory transfer. New therapeutic opportunities are therefore possible.

Identification of human brain loci processing esophageal sensation using positron emission tomography

BACKGROUND & AIMS Brain loci that process human esophageal sensation remain unidentified. The aim of this study was to identify the brain loci that process nonpainful and painful human esophageal sensation. METHODS In 8 healthy subjects (7 men; age range, 24-47 years), distal esophageal stimulation was performed by repeatedly inflating a balloon at volumes that produced either no sensation, definite sensation, or pain. Two positron emission tomography scans were performed for each sensation using H2(15)O. Magnetic resonance brain scans were also performed in each subject, and the positron emission tomography data were coregistered with magnetic resonance scans. Analysis of covariance-corrected t images showing the contrasts definite sensation-baseline, pain-baseline, and pain-definite sensation were created. RESULTS Nonpainful stimulation elicited bilateral activations along the central sulcus, insular cortex, and frontal/parietal operculum (P < 0.01). Painful stimulation produced more intense activations of the same areas and additional activation of the right anterior insular cortex and the anterior cingulate gyrus. Multiple areas of decreased activation were also observed; prominent among these was the right prefrontal cortex, which was inhibited during both nonpainful and painful stimulation. CONCLUSIONS Esophageal sensation activates bilaterally the insula, primary somatosensory cortex, and operculum. The right anterior insular cortex and anterior cingulate gyrus process esophageal pain.

A classification of chronic pain for ICD-11

Chronic pain has been recognized as pain that persists past normal healing time5 and hence lacks the acute warning function of physiological nociception.35 Usually pain is regarded as chronic when it lasts or recurs for more than 3 to 6 months.29 Chronic pain is a frequent condition, affecting an estimated 20% of people worldwide6,13,14,18 and accounting for 15% to 20% of physician visits.25,28 Chronic pain should receive greater attention as a global health priority because adequate pain treatment is a human right, and it is the duty of any health care system to provide it.4,13 The current version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) of the World Health Organization (WHO) includes some diagnostic codes for chronic pain conditions, but these diagnoses do not reflect the actual epidemiology of chronic pain, nor are they categorized in a systematic manner. The ICD is the preeminent tool for coding diagnoses and documenting investigations or therapeutic measures within the health care systems of many countries. In addition, ICD codes are commonly used to report target diseases and comorbidities of participants in clinical research. Consequently, the current lack of adequate coding in the ICD makes the acquisition of accurate epidemiological data related to chronic pain difficult, prevents adequate billing for health care expenses related to pain treatment, and hinders the development and implementation of new therapies.10,11,16,23,27,31,37 Responding to these shortcomings, the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) contacted the WHO and established a Task Force for the Classification of Chronic Pain. The IASP Task Force, which comprises pain experts from across the globe,19 has developed a new and pragmatic classification of chronic pain for the upcoming 11th revision of the ICD. The goal is to create a classification system that is applicable in primary care and in clinical settings for specialized pain management. A major challenge in this process was finding a rational principle of classification that suits the different types of chronic pain and fits into the general ICD-11 framework. Pain categories are variably defined based on the perceived location (headache), etiology (cancer pain), or the primarily affected anatomical system (neuropathic pain). Some diagnoses of pain defy these classification principles (fibromyalgia). This problem is not unique to the classification of pain, but exists throughout the ICD. The IASP Task Force decided to give first priority to pain etiology, followed by underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, and finally the body site. Developing this multilayered classification was greatly facilitated by a novel principle of assigning diagnostic codes in ICD-11, termed “multiple parenting.” Multiple parenting allows the same diagnosis to be subsumed under more than 1 category (for a glossary of ICD terms refer to Table ​Table1).1). Each diagnosis retains 1 category as primary parent, but is cross-referenced to other categories that function as secondary parents. Table 1 Glossary of ICD-11 terms. The new ICD category for “Chronic Pain” comprises the most common clinically relevant disorders. These disorders were divided into 7 groups (Fig. ​(Fig.1):1): (1) chronic primary pain, (2) chronic cancer pain, (3) chronic posttraumatic and postsurgical pain, (4) chronic neuropathic pain, (5) chronic headache and orofacial pain, (6) chronic visceral pain, and (7) chronic musculoskeletal pain. Experts assigned to each group are responsible for the definition of diagnostic criteria and the selection of the diagnoses to be included under these subcategories of chronic pain. Thanks to Bedirhan Ustun and Robert Jakob of the WHO, these pain diagnoses are now integrated in the beta version of ICD-11 (http://id.who.int/icd/entity/1581976053). The Task Force is generating content models for single entities to describe their clinical characteristics. After peer review overseen by the WHO Steering Committee,39 the classification of chronic pain will be voted into action by the World Health Assembly in 2017. Figure 1 Organizational chart of Task Force, IASP, and WHO interactions. The IASP Task Force was created by the IASP council and its scope defined in direct consultation of the chairs (R.D.T. and W.R.) with WHO representatives in 2012. The Task Force reports to ... 2. Classification of chronic pain Chronic pain was defined as persistent or recurrent pain lasting longer than 3 months. This definition according to pain duration has the advantage that it is clear and operationalized. Optional specifiers for each diagnosis record evidence of psychosocial factors and the severity of the pain. Pain severity can be graded based on pain intensity, pain-related distress, and functional impairment. 2.1. Chronic primary pain Chronic primary pain is pain in 1 or more anatomic regions that persists or recurs for longer than 3 months and is associated with significant emotional distress or significant functional disability (interference with activities of daily life and participation in social roles) and that cannot be better explained by another chronic pain condition. This is a new phenomenological definition, created because the etiology is unknown for many forms of chronic pain. Common conditions such as, eg, back pain that is neither identified as musculoskeletal or neuropathic pain, chronic widespread pain, fibromyalgia, and irritable bowel syndrome will be found in this section and biological findings contributing to the pain problem may or may not be present. The term “primary pain” was chosen in close liaison with the ICD-11 revision committee, who felt this was the most widely acceptable term, in particular, from a nonspecialist perspective.

Recovery of swallowing after dysphagic stroke relates to functional reorganization in the intact motor cortex

BACKGROUND & AIMS The aim of this study was to determine the mechanism for recovery of swallowing after dysphagic stroke. METHODS Twenty-eight patients who had a unilateral hemispheric stroke were studied 1 week and 1 and 3 months after the stroke by videofluoroscopy. Pharyngeal and thenar electromyographic responses to magnetic stimulation of multiple sites over both hemispheres were recorded, and motor representations were correlated with swallowing recovery. RESULTS Dysphagia was initially present in 71% of patients and in 46% and 41% of the patients at 1 and 3 months, respectively. Cortical representation of the pharynx was smaller in the affected hemisphere (5 +/- 1 sites) than the unaffected hemisphere (13 +/- 1 sites; P </= 0.001). Nondysphagic and persistently dysphagic patients showed little change in pharyngeal representation in either hemisphere at 1 and 3 months compared with presentation, but dysphagic patients who recovered had an increased pharyngeal representation in the unaffected hemisphere at 1 and 3 months (15 +/- 2 and 17 +/- 3 vs. 9 +/- 2 sites; P </= 0.02) without change in the affected hemisphere. In contrast, thenar representation increased in the affected hemisphere but not the unaffected hemisphere at 1 and 3 months (P </= 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Return of swallowing after dysphagic stroke is associated with increased pharyngeal representation in the unaffected hemisphere, suggesting a role for intact hemisphere reorganization in recovery.

Increased capsaicin receptor TRPV1 nerve fibres in the inflamed human oesophagus.

Background Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) patients commonly describe symptoms of heartburn and chest pain. The capsaicin receptor vanilloid receptor 1 (TRPV1) (VR1) is a cation channel expressed by sensory neurones and activated by heat, acid pH and ethanol, which may trigger burning pain. Aim To study the distribution of TRPV1-expressing nerve fibres in oesophageal mucosal biopsies from patients with symptomatic oesophagitis and in control subjects. Methods Biopsies were taken at gastroscopy from the distal oesophagus of seven symptomatic oesophagitis patients and seven asymptomatic patients undergoing investigation for iron-deficiency anaemia. These biopsies were studied by immunohistochemistry using affinity-purified antibodies to TRPV1 and to the neuronal marker peripherin. The density of oesophageal epithelial TRPV1 innervation was assessed by calculating the proportion of papillae in each oesophageal epithelium biopsy specimen containing TRPV1-immunoreactive fibres. Results TRPV1-immunoreactive nerves were distributed within the lamina propria in healthy subjects and in oesophagitis patients. The percentage of papillae positive for TRPV1 was elevated in oesophagitis patients compared with controls. Peripherin fibre density was not significantly different between the groups. Conclusions TRPV1-immunoreactive sensory nerve fibres are expressed in human oesophageal mucosa both in health and in disease. Increased TRPV1 expression in the inflamed oesophagus may mediate the heartburn in oesophagitis, and TRPV1 blockers may provide novel treatment.

Explaining oropharyngeal dysphagia after unilateral hemispheric stroke.

BACKGROUND Oropharyngeal dysphagia occurs in up to a third of patients presenting with a unilateral hemiplegic stroke, yet its neurophysiological basis remains unknown. To explore the relation between cortical motor function of swallowing and oropharyngeal dysphagia, mylohyoid, pharyngeal, and thenar electromyographic responses to stimulation of affected and unaffected hemispheres were recorded in dysphagic and non-dysphagic patients. METHODS The 20 patients studied had unilateral hemispheric stroke confirmed by computed tomography. Eight of them had associated swallowing difficulties. Electromyographic responses were recorded after suprathreshold transcranial magneto-electric stimulation of affected and unaffected hemispheres with a figure-of-eight coil. FINDINGS Stimulation of the unaffected hemisphere evoked smaller pharyngeal responses in dysphagic patients than in non-dysphagic patients (mean 64 microV, median 48, interquartile range 44-86 vs 118 microV, 81, 73-150) (p < 0.02). With stimulation of the affected hemisphere, the pharyngeal responses were smaller than for the unaffected hemisphere but similar between the two patient groups (26 microV, 0, 0-48 vs 54 microV, 0, 0-80). Dysphagic and non-dysphagic patients showed similar mylohyoid and thenar responses to stimulation of the unaffected hemisphere as well as to stimulation of the affected hemisphere-unaffected mylohyoid (269 microV, 239, 89-372 vs 239 microV, 163, 133-307), thenar (572 microV, 463, 175-638 vs 638 microV, 485, 381-764); affected mylohyoid (60 microV, 41, 0-129 vs 96 microV, 0, 0-195); thenar (259 microV, 258, 0-538 vs 451 microV, 206, 8-717). INTERPRETATION The findings indicate that dysphagia after unilateral hemispheric stroke is related to the magnitude of pharyngeal motor representation in the unaffected hemisphere.

Peripheral and central mechanisms of visceral sensitization in man

Abstract  Visceral hypersensitivity (perception of gastrointestinal sensory events at a lower‐than‐normal threshold) is considered to be an important pathophysiological mechanism in the development of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs), such as irritable bowel syndrome, non‐cardiac chest pain and functional dyspepsia. These disorders are associated with significant health care and socioeconomic costs due to factors such as repeated visits to consultants, hospitalizations and work absenteeism. Despite the presence of extensive evidence linking visceral hypersensitivity and FGIDs, the mechanism(s) underlying visceral hypersensitivity has not been fully elucidated. Suggested hypotheses include sensitization of afferent neurones, both at the level of the enteric and the (afferent) autonomic nervous system (peripheral sensitization), sensitization of spinal cord dorsal horn neurones (central sensitization) and psychosocial factors/psychiatric comorbidity influencing the processing of afferent signals at the level of the brain. Importantly, these hypotheses may be complementary rather than mutually exclusive. However, the degree to which each of these mechanisms contributes to the overall perception of visceral pain, and therefore the generation of symptoms, still remains unclear. This article discusses the mechanisms that may underlie visceral hypersensitivity, with reference to FGIDs. Understanding these mechanisms is essential in order to improve the diagnosis and treatment of patients with these disorders.