MEDICINE
CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE
Irritable Bowel Syndrome—The Main
Recommendations
Viola Andresen, Jutta Keller, Christian Pehl, Michael Schemann, Jan Preiss, Peter Layer
SUMMARY
Background: Irritable bowel syndrome is characterized by chronic abdominal
symptoms and irregular bowel movements without any cause than can be
revealed by routine diagnostic assessment. In recent years, its pathophysiology has come to be much better understood, and new therapeutic
approaches have been developed. These advances were taken into consideration and assessed for their relevance to clinical practice in the framework of a new interdisciplinary S3 guideline.
Methods: A systematic search of the literature retrieved a total 5573 articles,
from which 243 were selected on the basis of criteria relating to their form and
content, individually assessed, and summarized in evidence tables. The recommendations formulated in this way were discussed in a Delphi procedure and a
consensus conference, then accordingly modified and finalized.
Results: Variable symptom constellations are caused by disturbances of gastrointestinal regulation at multiple levels. The diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome requires both chronic bowel symptoms that interfere with everyday life
and the exclusion of relevant differential diagnoses. Its treatment is based on
general therapeutic principles, dietary recommendations, psychological components, and symptomatic medication. Bulking agents, laxatives, spasmolytics,
loperamide, and probiotic agents are recommended (with variable recommendation strengths), as are—for selected patients— antidepressants, 5-HT4
agonists, 5-HT3 antagonists, and topical antibiotics.
Conclusion: The first German S3 guideline on irritable bowel syndrome translates up-to-date scientific knowledge as represented in current publications
into concrete recommendations for diagnosis and treatment in clinical practice.
In the future, it is likely that further causative pathophysiological mechanisms
will be discovered; this should lead, in turn, to the development of new,
causally directed treatments, which will supplement or replace the traditional,
purely symptomatic treatments that are still in use today.
►Cite this as:
Andresen V, Keller J, Pehl C, Schemann M, Preiss J, Layer P:
Clinical practice guideline: Irritable bowel syndrome—the main
recommendations. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60.
DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2011.0751
Israelitisches Krankenhaus Hamburg: Dr. MSc Andresen, Prof. Dr. med. Layer, Dr. med. Keller
Kreiskrankenhaus Medizinische Klinik Vilsbiburg: PD Dr. med. Pehl
Lehrstuhl für Humanbiologie, Technische Universität München: Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Schemann
Medizinische Klinik für Gastroenterologie, Infektiologie und Rheumatologie, Campus Benjamin Franklin
Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin: Dr. med. Jan Preiss
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
ith the increasing knowledge on the pathogenesis, pathophysiology, and rational management of irritable bowel syndrome, the time has come to
implement them in pragmatic recommendations
adapted to our health care system. This was the aim of
an interdisciplinary S3 guideline under the aegis of the
German Society for Digestive and Metabolic Diseases
(DGVS, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und
Stoffwechselkrankheiten) and the German Society for
Neurogastroenterology
and
Motility
(DGNM,
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurogastroenterologie und
Motilität) (eBox 1) (1), the main practice-relevant statements of which are presented in this article. For details
of the recommendations and commentary on them, especially in relation to pediatric patients, the reader is referred to the full text of the guideline ([1], in German).
W
Methods
The DGVS and DGNM formed a coordination committee, which in January 2008, in consultation with the
Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany
(AWMF, Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen
Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften), laid down the
methodology for the guideline. The guideline group
was made up of 69 representatives of various medical
specialties, 26 of whom were named as authors (eBox
1). After the consensus conference (September 2009), a
manuscript was produced, which with the agreement of
all the participating medical societies was published in
February 2011. For the clinical questions, a systematic
literature search up to September 2008 was carried out
on MedLine, PreMedLine, Psycinfo, cambase, and the
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.
For this, a basic search was defined to capture all
relevant publications in the field (eBox 2). To answer
the questions specific to each working group, the working groups defined further search terms and exclusion
criteria that were linked to the basic search and special
methodological filters (eBox 2). Publications included
were controlled studies and observational studies with a
study time of at least 4 weeks, but not case series (formal selection). The identified literature was further
selected by evaluating each publication on the basis of
its title, abstract, and, if necessary, the full text for
whether it was suitable to answer key questions (content selection). If questions were answered by evidence
level 1 publications, it was unnecessary to draw on
publications of a lower evidence level.
751
MEDICINE
TABLE 1
Recommendation strengths
Strength of
recommendation
Formulation
Meaning for physicians
Meaning for patients
Symbol
Strongly for
Virtually always
Most patients should receive the
recommended intervention
Almost all patients would decide in
favor of the recommended intervention;
only a small minority would not
↑↑
Weakly for
In most/some
patients
Different decisions are appropriate for
different patients, depending on the
patient's situation but also on personal
opinions and preferences
The majority of patients (>50%) would
decide in favor of the intervention, but
many would not
↑
Weakly against
Rather not
Probably don't do it
The majority of patients (>50%) would
decide against the intervention, but
many would not
Strongly against
Virtually never
Definitely don't do it
Almost all patients would decide
against the recommended intervention;
only a small minority would not
Unclear
No recommendation should remain an exception to be justified. In clinical practice, a decision often
has to be made despite the absence of data.
Out of 5573 identified publications, 243 were
selected, individually evaluated, summarized in evidence tables, and the tables made available to all participants as part of the consensus process. In the present
short version of the guideline, selected publications are
cited that form the basis of central recommendations;
more recent studies that were not published at the time
the guideline was being compiled are marked accordingly.
After iterative processing in a modified Delphi procedure, the recommendations were modified and
agreed at a consensus conference. The formulation of
each recommendation strength followed a defined
scheme (Table 1). Recommendations for which no consensus was reached were readdressed in a further,
online Delphi round.
As an aid to comprehension, some of the statements
are reproduced in this article in paraphrased and commented form. Evidence level, recommendation
strength, and consensus strength are given in general
form in the text and more specifically in the tables in
the specific treatment sections.
The guideline was exclusively financed through the
DGVS and was developed under conditions of editorial
independence. All participants were required to declare
potential conflicts of interest. The details of the
methodology are provided in a comprehensive methods
report (2).
Definition
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is present when all
three of the following are fulfilled:
● The patient has chronic symptoms, i.e. lasting
longer than 3 months (e.g., abdominal pain, bloating), that are ascribed by both patient and
752
physician to the gut and that are usually accompanied by altered bowel habit.
● The symptoms are the reason why the patient has
consulted the physician for help and/or is worried,
and are so strong that the patient’s quality of life is
significantly impaired by them.
● It is a precondition that no changes are present
which are characteristic of other diseases that are
likely to be the cause of the symptoms (strong
consensus).
This new definition thus differs from all its predecessors including the Rome III consensus (e1): The
hitherto obligatory symptom combination of abdominal
pain and altered bowel habit has been dropped; on the
other hand, the typical and often particularly distressing
symptom complex of bloating and flatulence is included. For the first time the severity of the symptoms,
which distinguishes them from ordinary “digestive
symptoms,” is mandatory for the diagnosis: Only significant impairments of quality of life indicate systematic diagnostic and therapeutic management.
Pathogenesis
In IBS, gastrointestinal motility, secretion, and perception are disturbed. Consistently, although always only
in subpopulations, molecular and cellular alterations at
the mucosal level, changes in gut flora, disturbances of
superordinated regulatory systems, and increased
prevalence of psychological co-morbidities are demonstrated. Interactions/interrelationships between causal
and secondary alterations are unclear. These changes
have been demonstrated in separate studies and are not
IBS-specific, and therefore they do not allow a specific
diagnosis to be made. However, they do contribute to
an understanding of the causative pathological
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
MEDICINE
TABLE 2
Pathogenic factors and proven changes in Irritable Bowel Syndrome*1
A) Pathogenetic factors
Comments
Development of IBS from bacterial
enteritis (“postinfectious IBS”)
– The risk of IBS is 8 to 15 times higher after bacterial enteritis– The more severe the acute
illness, the higher the risk
– Up to 30% of those who have acute bacterial enteritis may develop IBS that persists for
years
Altered intestinal flora
– Alteration of gut flora has been shown (not yet known is whether this is a cause or a consequence of disturbed function)
– IBS developing after bacterial infection of the gut (see above)
– IBS developing after antibiotic therapy
– Gut flora are important for barrier function and mucosal immune system (see below)
– IBS symptoms are improved by probiotics or topical antibiotics
Personal predisposition
– Probable mechanisms: genetic factors; learned behavioral patterns
Psychological factors
– Traumatic events (incl. abuse), psychological co-morbidity (e.g., depression, anxiety disorder), and stress may cause exacerbation; in some subgroups they may even be causative
B) Proven changes
Comments
Altered motility
– Increased transit time in constipation-dominant IBS
– Reduced transit time in diarrhea-dominant IBS
– Disturbed gas transit, mainly through the small intestine, but also in the colon (in addition
to increased gas production)
Altered sensitivity
– Reduced pain threshold during rectal balloon distension (barostat)
– Altered cerebral processing of visceral stimuli
Mucosal permeability
– Reduced tissue resistance
– Reduced barrier function
– Reduced expression of tight junction protein ZO-1
Immune cells in mucosal biopsies
– Intraepithelial T cells
– Mast cells
– Nerve–mast cell association
– Increased number of CD3+ lymphocytes
– Increased number and reactivity of c-kit-positive and tryptase-positive cells
– Stronger local association between nerves and mast cells
Immune mediators in mucosal biopsies
– Tryptase and other proteases
– Histamine
– Proteases
– Cytokines
– Defensins
– Increased release
– Increased release
– Increased released in diarrhea-dominant IBS
– Increased release of IL1β in postinfectious IBS
– Increased release of human β-defensin 2
Nerves in mucosal biopsies
– Nerve fibers
– Visceral afferents
– Increased number of PGP 9.5-positive nerve fibers, increased expression of substance P
– Increased expression of TRPV1
Supernatants of mucosal biopsies
– Neural sensitization
– Activation of enteric nervous system by histamine, serotonin, and proteases
– Activation of visceral afferents
Immune mediators in the blood
– Cytokines
– HPA axis
– Antibodies
– Raised Th2 cytokine concentration, raised IL6, IL8, TNFα, and IL1β concentrations
– Raised ACTH and cortisol concentrations
– Antibodies against bacterial flagellin
Serotonin metabolism
– Serotonin concentration
– Enterochromaffin cells
– Serotonin reuptake transporters
(SERTs)
Gene expression
– Mucosa
– Raised plasma serotonin concentration in diarrhea-dominant IBS
– Increased number in mucosal biopsies
– Altered SERT expression and function
– Increased expression of DKFZP564O0823 (presumed function: mucus production)
Stool
– Mediators originating from <<please
confirm>> immune cells or microbiota
– Microbiota
– Increased concentration of human α-defensin, proteases, S100A12, lactoferrin
– Unstable microbiota
*1 Changes shown in separate studies and each time only in subpopulations of the IBS patients;
they are not IBS-specific and therefore do not allow a positive diagnosis
ACTH, adrenocorticotropic hormone; HPA axis, hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis; IL, interleukin; ZO-1, zonula occludens 1;
PGP, protein gene product (pan-neuronal marker); TRPV1, transient receptor potential vanniloid receptor 1 (visceral afferent marker)
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
753
MEDICINE
FIGURE 1
BOX 1
Symptoms lead to doctor visit
Lab – abdom.
US – gyn.
History and PE
“Organic”
clues?
Laboratory investigations in patients
with unexplained chronic abdominal
symptoms
● Generally recommended laboratory tests
Yes
No
Diarrhea
No
not IBS!
Yes
Comprehensive
diagnostic work-up
Individual criteria:
Symptoms: severity, duration, dynamics
Patient: age, personality, degree of concern
But:
IBS diagnosis
not yet justified
Try therapy?
●
Targeted further
diagnostic
procedures
Diagnostic work-up in first-time investigation of chronic abdominal symptoms
that could point to irritable bowel syndrome
PE, physical examination (including rectal); abdom. US, abdominal ultrasonography;
gyn., gynecological examination; IBS, irritable bowel syndrome
mechanisms (Table 2), and thus form the foundation for
research into new treatment options (3).
Diagnosis
IBS is basically a clinical diagnosis. Careful history
taking to record and classify the complex of symptoms
is key. The diagnosis can be made on this basis so long
as other differential diagnoses can be reliably ruled out.
Thus, confirmation of the diagnosis requires two
components:
● The history and pattern of symptoms suggest IBS.
● Other relevant candidate diagnoses can be specifically ruled out on the basis of symptoms,
especially when red flag symptoms are present
(evidence level B, recommendation strength ↑↑,
strong consensus).
Once a reliable initial diagnosis has been made, so
long as no new aspects occur, no repeat diagnostic
procedure should be undertaken (evidence level A,
recommendation strength ↑↑, strong consensus)
Early confirmed diagnosis is important to avoid delayed diagnosis of other, more serious possible causes
of the symptoms; this is particularly the case when the
symptoms have not been present for very long (4) (evidence level A, recommendation strength ↑↑, strong
consensus). If diarrhea is the main symptom, an irritable bowel is usually not the cause (5). However, in
more than 10% of cases other constellations of symptoms without alarm symptoms or signs of inflammation
are caused by an “organic” disease.
On the other hand, celiac disease (6, 7, e2), chronic
inflammatory bowel disease (4, 8), and also colon and
ovarian carcinoma (4, 9–11, e3, e4) and chronic
754
– Full blood count
– Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)/C-reactive protein (CRP)
– Urine analysis
Optional laboratory tests on an individual basis
– Serum electrolytes, renal retention values, hepatic
and pancreatic enzymes
– TSH
– Blood glucose/HbA
1c
– Fecal microbiology (especially in patients with diarrhea)
– Celiac disease antibodies (anti-transglutaminase
antibodies)
– Calprotectin A/lactoferrin
BOX 2
Recommendations relating
to nutrition in IBS
● Investigate for carbohydrate malabsorption syndrome
●
●
●
●
●
(e.g., lactose fructose, sorbitol), and, if evidence is
shown, trial avoidance of the relevant sugar
Investigate for other food intolerances and trial avoidance of any foods indicated, after extensive dietary
advice
Trial of a reduced-gluten diet is a possibility in some
adults with IBS without signs of celiac disease
During elimination dieting, regular monitoring is essential to prevent malnutrition; the diet should be permanently continued only if the patient shows response to
treatment
Consider the use of bulking agents in patients with
constipation
Consider the use of probiotics; choose strains according to symptoms
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
MEDICINE
FIGURE 2
TABLE 3
Important differential diagnoses of IBS in patients with
chronic abdominal IBS-like symptoms
Main
symptom
Important differential diagnoses
(among others)
Diarrhea
Chronic infectious enterocolitis, e.g., bacterial, parasitic, or viral (e.g., cytomegalovirus
[CMV] with or without immunosuppression)
pathogens; fungal infections (e.g., histoplasmosis in HIV)
Crohn’s disease
Ulcerative colitis
Celiac disease/sprue
Bacterial infection of the small intestine
Symptomatic carbohydrate malabsorption
(e.g., lactose or fructose malabsorption)
Microscopic colitis
Bile acid malabsorption
Clostridium difficile colitis
Motility disorders of the small intestine
Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency
Autonomic neuropathy (diabetes)
Drug intolerance
Food allergy
Hyperthyroidism
Incontinence
Functionally active neuroendocrine tumor
Colorectal carcinoma (paradoxical diarrhea)
Pain
Crohn’s disease
Ulcer
Gastrointestinal tumor
Mesenteric ischemia
Porphyria
Endometriosis
Ovarian tumor
Small-bowel stenoses (e.g., radiogenic,
adhesions)
Postoperative functional impairment
(e.g., adhesions)
C1-esterase inhibitor deficiency
Intestinal motility disorders (e.g., chronic
intestinal pseudo-obstruction)
Constipation
Adverse drug effect
Hypothyroidism
Colorectal carcinoma (alternating with paradoxical diarrhea in patients with symptoms
of stenosis)
Chronic diverticulitis
Motility disorders, e.g., neuropathic colonic
paresis (slow-transit constipation)
Functional or structural defecation disorders
Bloating,
distension
Bacterial infection (small-intestinal bacterial
overgrowth; often secondary, e.g., in smallbowel diverticula, motility disorders, etc.)
Carbohydrate malabsorption (e.g., symptomatic lactose and/or fructose malabsorption)
Postoperative functional disorders (e.g., adhesions)
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
Confirm diagnosis
Guidance from physician: inform the patient, explain the disease
Pain
Spasmolytics
Probiotics
Phytotherapeutics
Soluble bulking
agents
Poss.: antidepressants
Poss.: topical antibiotics
General
measures
Bloating
Probiotics
Topical antibiotics
Simethicone
Phytotherapeutics
Diet
Exercise
Stool regulation
Constipation
PEG–electrolyte
solution
Bulking agents
Conventional laxatives
Prucalopride
Probiotics
Phytotherapeutics
Spasmolytics
Poss.: SSRIs
Exercise
(In some cases:
lubiprostone)
Drug therapy*:
t4ZNQUPN
oriented
t5SJBM
t.BZCF
combined
Diarrhea
Loperamide
Cholestyramine
Probiotics
Topical antibiotics
Bulking agents
Phytotherapeutics
Spasmolytics
Poss.: tricyclic
antidepressants
The management of IBS involves reliable confirmation of the diagnosis, patient guidance, including explanation of the disease, general measures, and symptom-oriented medical therapy.
*It must be borne in mind that many new drugs whose effectiveness has been confirmed are
only licensed outside Germany, or are not licensed in Germany for this indication (off-label).
Poss., possibly
gastrointestinal motility disorders (12) often show typical “irritable bowel symptoms” as the dominant—often
the first or only—clinical manifestation in 40% to 85%
of those affected.
A confirmed diagnosis that convinces both the patient and the physician (Figure 1) also has significance
for treatment and the economics of health: a better relationship of trust and the reassurance conveyed by it
makes an essential contribution to the success of treatment. The consequence is a reduction in “doctor shopping” and subsequent diagnostic procedures. Given the
chronic nature of the disease, this effect is of great
importance in the long-term management.
In an unknown patient, a basic diagnostic procedure
must always be carried out (evidence level D, recommendation strength ↑↑, strong consensus) and, depending on the history and pattern of symptoms, be
supplemented by individually tailored further diagnostic steps in a carefully targeted manner (evidence
level D, recommendation strength ↑, strong consensus).
Overdiagnosis and the indiscriminate use of resources
should be avoided.
The focus is on a careful history (evidence level A,
recommendation strength ↑↑, strong consensus) and the
physical
examination
(evidence
level
D,
recommendation strength ↑↑, strong consensus),
supplemented by basic laboratory testing (evidence
755
MEDICINE
TABLE 4
Recommendations for treatment of pain in IBS
Therapy
Try therapy
Peripheral analgesics
Rather not
[Evidence level B (paracetamol),
evidence level D for other drugs,
recommendation strength ,
strong consensus]
Opiates and opiate
agonists
Virtually never
[Evidence level A for kappa agonists,
evidence level D for µ- agonists and
classical opiates, evidence level A for
opiate antagonists, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Spasmolytics
In most patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Soluble fiber
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Tricyclic antidepressants
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
SSRIs
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
5-HT3 antagonists
In few selected pa- [Evidence level A, recommendation
tients
strength ↑, consensus]
Probiotics
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Antibiotics
Rather not
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength , consensus]
Pregabalin/gabapentin
Rather not
[Evidence level B , recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Phytotherapeutics
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Aloe vera
Rather not
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Pancreatic enzymes
Virtually never
[Evidence level D, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
level B, recommendation strength ↑↑, strong consensus) (Box 1), abdominal ultrasound (evidence level D,
recommendation strength ↑, consensus), and, in
women, gynecological examination (evidence level B,
recommendation strength ↑↑, strong consensus).
After these have been carried out, if results are normal, treatment may be started on a trial basis even without a confirmed diagnosis (see below) (evidence level
D, recommendation strength ↑, consensus). This should
be decided on an individual basis and is justified
particularly in patients with mild, non-progressive
symptoms, but does not allow a diagnosis of IBS to be
made (Figure 1).
In patients with chronic diarrhea as an important
symptom, detailed diagnostic work-up including
pathogen identification in the stool and endoscopic and
functional diagnostic examinations (with staged
biopsies) are indicated (evidence level A, recommendation strength ↑↑, strong consensus) (Figure 1).
Confirmation of IBS in an adult requires an ileocolonoscopy (evidence level D, recommendation strength
↑, consensus).
756
The diagnostic procedure should be supplemented
on an individual basis by endoscopic, imaging, functional diagnostic, and, if relevant, other procedures in
order to rule out other candidate diagnoses (see Table 3)
that can cause symptoms typical of IBS (evidence level
B, recommendation strength ↑↑, strong consensus). The
criteria for this are the intensity and pattern of symptoms, patient age, duration of symptoms, symptom
dynamics, and a psychological assessment of the
patient. Food intolerances can be tested by trialing targeted elimination diets (evidence level D, recommendation strength ↑, consensus); testing of immunoglobulin-G
titers for food allergens (evidence level D, recommendation strength ↓, consensus) and determination of
quantitative parameters of stool flora (e.g., “intestinal
ecograms”) should not be carried out (evidence level D,
recommendation strength ↓↓, consensus).
Treatment
General principles of management
It is important to provide the patient with a comprehensible pathophysiological model of the disease and the
management plan. Ruling out possible more threatening differential diagnoses and establishing a relationship of trust between physician and patient will both
promote treatment success (13). Individual triggering
factors should be identified and taken into account
(evidence level D, recommendation strength ↑↑, strong
consensus).
The measure of any treatment plan is how far symptoms improve and how well the patient tolerates it, and
all treatments are trial treatments at first because it is
impossible to predict the response to treatment in any
particular case. This should be discussed with the
patient beforehand. Any treatment regime that is
successful can be continued, changed to a long-term or
as-needed regimen, or interrupted for a trial withdrawal. If treatment success is inadequate, various
drugs (and non-drug treatments) may be used in succession or in combination. Ineffective drugs should be
terminated after 3 months at the latest (evidence level
D, recommendation strength ↑, strong consensus).
After careful individualized weighing up of the risks
and benefits, in some cases, especially in patients with
severe symptoms that are refractory to treatment, offlabel therapies may be worthwhile, if current scientific
knowledge suggests there is reason to expect relevant
therapeutic utility. The same applies to active substances that to date are only licensed abroad, although
in this case consultation with a specialized center is advisable (evidence level D, recommendation strength ↑,
consensus).
As to nutrition and lifestyle there are no general prescriptions. However, nutritional and behavioral advice
should be given to eliminate individual symptom
triggers (e.g., stressors, defined foods, lack of exercise
or sleep, and so on). Likewise, psychological influential factors and co-morbidities (e.g., depressive
disorders) and extraintestinal symptoms (tendency to
somatization!) should be ascertained.
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
MEDICINE
Alternative therapies cannot be recommended at
present because of a lack of data; complementary therapies may be considered in individual cases (evidence
level A* for acupuncture, otherwise C/D; recommendation strength ↓; strong consensus). *A meta-analysis
of several acupuncture studies found no acupuncturespecific effect on irritable bowel syndrome (e5).
Nutritional recommendations
Although no general dietetic measures are recommended, individualized advice orientated to the existing symptoms and individual intolerances should be
given (Box 2) (evidence level B, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus).
Psychological co-morbidities
To register the psychological co-morbidities that are
often present in patients with IBS, it is often enough
simply to ask about anxiety disorders and depressive
symptoms, and (careful!) exploration of trauma and
abuse. If appropriate, the patient should be referred for
professional psychiatric/psychological/psychosomatic
examination and/or care (evidence level D, recommendation strength ↑, strong consensus). Any signs of
relevant psychosocial stress also indicate psychological
diagnostic steps and possibly psychotherapy. At the
same time, general medical care should be continued
(evidence level A, recommendation strength ↑↑, consensus).
At the general and specialist medical level, basic
psychotherapeutic intervention can often be carried out
to favorable effect, e.g., using self-help strategies (evidence level A, recommendation strength ↑, strong consensus). Pure relaxation therapies (autogenic training,
etc.) should not be carried out as monotherapy, but
should be combined with other measures (evidence
level B, recommendation strength ↓, consensus). More
costly and time-consuming psychological techniques
(gut-directed hypnosis, cognitive behavioral therapy,
psychodynamic therapy) are effective and should be integrated in an interdisciplinary therapy plan (evidence
level A, recommendation strength ↑, strong consensus).
Antidepressants may be indicated in the presence of
psychological co-morbidities (anxiety disorder, depression) (evidence level A, recommendation strength
↑, strong consensus). Tricyclic antidepressants to treat
the irritable bowel symptoms (diarrhea, pain; beware of
constipation) should be given at doses lower than the
usual (evidence level A, recommendation strength ↑,
strong consensus); selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in particular can also be given in
constipation-dominant IBS (evidence level B, recommendation strength ↑, consensus). However, irritable
bowel symptoms seem not to respond to antidepressants in the absence of psychological co-morbidities.
Targeted symptom-orientated therapy
General treatment measures including confirmation of
the diagnosis and patient information about the disease
can be supplemented with symptom-orientated drug
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
TABLE 5
Recommendations for the treatment of diarrhea in IBS
Therapy
Try therapy
Loperamide
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Racecadotril
Cannot be recommended
[Evidence level D, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Bulking agents (soluble fiber )
In some patients
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
5-HT3 antagonists
In few selected
patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, consensus]
Cholestyramine
In some patients
[Evidence level C, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Probiotics
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Antibiotics
Rather not
[Evidence level C, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Phytotherapeutics
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, consensus]
Aloe vera
Rather not
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Spasmolytics
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, consensus]
Traditional Chinese
medicine/herbal
medicine
Rather not
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength , consensus]
treatment (evidence level D, recommendation strength
↑↑, strong consensus) (Figure 2).
In this guideline a conscious decision was made not
to give effect sizes for individual therapies, since these
would reflect neither the scientific evidence nor practical reality:
● For many therapies insufficient study quality
means that no adequate data exist.
● There is a general inhomogeneity of study populations and of the criteria of treatment response
(pain, irregular bowel habit, bloating, etc.), which is
due to the multiplicity of symptoms, their variability,
and differences in pathological mechanisms.
● The typically fluctuating course of symptoms
often suggests falsely high rates of response to
placebo; on the other hand, all therapies show
variable rates of non-responders. For this reason,
even for therapies that are highly effective in subgroups, only moderate response rates are documented in the overall patient population. In most
cases, however, the relevant subgroup analyses
were not carried out. Thus, the moderate response
rates do not allow meaningful conclusions to be
drawn about the possible success of treatment in
any individual patient.
Typical examples of the distribution of the published
effect sizes of individual therapies compared to placebo
exist for, among others:
757
MEDICINE
●
TABLE 6
Recommendations for the treatment of constipation in IBS
Therapy
Try therapy
Bulking agents in the
form of soluble gelforming agents (e.g.,
psyllium)
In most patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Osmotis laxatives of
the macrogol type
In some patients
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus].
Other osmotic or
stimulating laxatives
In some patients
[Evidence level C, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Prucalopride
In some patients in [Evidence level B, recommendation
cases (refractory
strength ↑, consensus]
to other treatment)
Domperidone
Rather not
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Lubiprostone
In some patients
(if available)
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, consensus]
Antibiotics
Rather not
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength , consensus]
Probiotics
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Phytotherapeutic
STW 5
In some patients
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Other
phytotherapeutics
Rather not
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Spasmolytics
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
SSRIs
In some patients in [Evidence level B, recommendation
strength ↑, consensus]
IBS-C that is refractory to treatment, esp. with
pain ± psychol.
co-morbidity
IBS-C, constipation-dominant IBS; SSRIs, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors
TABLE 7
Recommendations for the treatment of bloating/abdominal distension/meteorism/flatulence
Therapy
Try therapy
Probiotics
In some patients
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Rifaximin
In some patients
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength ↑, consensus]
Phytopharmaceuticals
In some patients
Evidence level B, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Cholinergics/Parasympathomimetics
Rather not
[Evidence level A, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Antifoaming agents
In some patients
[Evidence level C, recommendation
strength ↑, strong consensus]
Pankreatic enzymes
Virtually never
[Evidence level D, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Analgesics
Rather not
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength , strong consensus]
Tricyclic antidepressants and SSRIs
Rather not
[Evidence level B, recommendation
strength , consensus]
SSRIs, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors
758
Probiotics, with moderate (!) rates of symptom
improvement between 0% and 88%, not only in
dependence on the study preparation and end
points, but also within fixed study protocols (14,
15).
● Antidepressants, about the fundamental effectiveness of which for irritable bowel symptoms there
are completely contradictory assessments: calculated overall effects range from ineffective (tending to poorer) to significantly effective (16, 17).
The most important therapy recommendations in relation to main symptom are summarized below; details
of formulations, recommendation strengths, evidence
levels, and strength of consensus are given in the
accompanying tables.
Pain (Table 4): Pain often responds to spasmolytics
(butylscopolamine, mebeverine, peppermint oil) (18,
e6) or probiotics (14, 15) as a basic therapy; in regard to
the latter it is still unclear which preparations
ameliorate which symptoms, so failures of treatment attempts are to be expected at the outset. Soluble bulking
agents may also trigger symptom exacerbations in
some cases. In some cases antidepressants may be tried
(especially in patients with psychological comorbidity) (17), or phytotherapeutics (e.g., STW 5), or,
especially in patients with diarrhea, 5-HT3 antagonists
(19).
Classical “analgesics” (acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, etc.) are
generally unsuitable, as are opioids and opioid agonists
(e7). Topical antibiotic therapy (rifaximin) is not yet
recommended in the guideline, but randomized studies
that have now been published indicate that they can
effect lasting amelioration of symptoms in nonconstipated patients with IBS (20).
Diarrhea (Table 5): In addition to classical antidiarrhetics (such as loperamide [e8]), cholestyramine,
soluble bulking agents, or probiotics can be helpful. It
can also be worth trying phytotherapeutics (e.g.,
STW 5) or spasmolytics (e.g., mebeverine, butylscopolamine, peppermint oil) or, especially where there is
psychological co-morbidity, tricyclic antidepressants.
Where symptoms are severe and refractory to treatment, a selective 5-HT3 antagonist (e.g., alosetron [19])
may be used, but only after careful weighing of the
risks versus the benefits, because of its very rare
adverse effects (ischemic colitis, severe constipation)
(21). A subgroup of patients respond well to rifaximin
(20) (see above), although this is not yet recommended
in the guideline.
Constipation (Table 6): In patients with constipation, the pathological mechanism should be identified as a first step; in particular, secondary forms of
constipation (drug effects, underlying diseases) and impaired anorectal function (defecation disorders) should
be ruled out.
Osmotic laxatives of the macrogol type are the most
effective and best tolerated (e9). Water-soluble bulking
agents are also suitable, but a watch must be kept for increased pain and/or bloating (e6). Other laxatives can
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
MEDICINE
also be tried, according to how effective they are and
how well they are tolerated. If adverse effects are experienced or symptoms increase, the new prokinetic
prucalopride should be used (22, 23).
Other therapeutic approaches to try include probiotics, phytotherapeutics (STW 5), spasmolytics, and
SSRIs; tricyclic antidepressants should be avoided in
patients with constipation. In some cases lubiprostone,
a chloride channel activator, may be tried, bearing in
mind any contraindications and its restricted availability (it is licensed in Switzerland and the USA). The
guanylate cyclase-C agonist linaclotide, which has
been shown to be effective in constipation-dominant
IBS (24), is expected to be licensed soon.
Bloating/abdominal distension/meteorism/flatulence (Table 7): Most patients also suffer from considerable—often predominant—symptoms in the form
of bloating, meteorism, and flatulence, the treatment of
which is therefore very important.
Improving constipation or diarrhea often also improves gas problems (evidence level A, recommendation strength ↑, strong consensus). An effective
measure is modulation of the intestinal flora with
probiotics (14, 25) or the topical antibiotic refaximin
(20). Less well proven are phytopharmaceuticals or
antifoaming agents (simethicone, dimethicone).
Conflict of interest statement
Dr. Preiss has received consultancy fees from Essex, authorship, co-authorship, and reviewing fees from Medac, and reimbursement of travel and accommodation costs together with lecture fees from Falk.
Professor Schemann has received consultancy and lecture fees from Shire
and Steigerwald. He has also received research funding into a third-party
account from Steigerwald.
Dr. Pehl has received consultancy fees from Movetis/Shire. He has had attendance fees at educational events and conferences and travel costs reimbursed
by Falk, Lilly, Shire, Merckle-Recordati, Abbott, Essex, Sanofi-Aventis, Novo
Nordisk, and Astra Seneca. He has received lecture fees from Buck Elektromedizin, Falk, Lilly, Movetis, and Shire. He has received research funding into
a third-party account from Fresenius and Medtronic.
Professor Layer has received consultancy fees from Abbott, Solvay, Shire, and
Norgine. He has had travel and accommodation costs reimbursed by Shire and
Norgine. He has also received lecture fees from Falk, Movetis/Shire, Abbott/
Solvay, Axcan, Boehringer, and Novartis. He has received fees for commissioned clinical studies by Axcan and Solvay.
Dr. Andresen has received consultancy and lecture fees and reimbursement of
travel and accommodation costs and attendance fees at educational events
and conferences from Norgine, Falk, Axcan, Abbott/Solvay and Shire/Movetis.
Dr. Keller has had attendance fees and travel and accommodation costs relating to lectures reimbursed by Aptalis Pharma and Shire. She has also received
lecture fees from these companies.
Manuscript received on 1 July 2011, revised version accepted on 1 August
2011.
Translated from the original German by Kersti Wagstaff MA.
REFERENCES
1. Layer P, Andresen V, Pehl C, et al.: S3-Leitlinie Reizdarmsyndrom:
Definition, Pathophysiologie, Diagnostik und Therapie. Gemeinsame
Leitlinie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für
Neurogastroenterologie und Motilität (DGNM)1 (AWMF-Registriernummer: 021/016). Z Gastroenterol 2011; 49: 237–93.
2. Preiss JC, Andresen V, Keller J, et al.: Methodikreport zur S3-Leitlinie Reizdarmsyndrom und Intestinale Motilitätsstörungen. AWMFHomepage 2011. www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/021–016.html
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
3. Spiller R, Garsed K: Postinfectious irritable bowel syndrome.
Gastroenterology 2009; 136: 1979–88.
4. Garcia Rodriguez LA, Ruigomez A, Wallander MA, et al.: Detection
of colorectal tumor and inflammatory bowel disease during followup of patients with initial diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome.
Scand J Gastroenterol 2000; 35: 306–11.
5. Fernandez-Banares F, Esteve M, Salas A, et al.: Systematic evaluation of the causes of chronic watery diarrhea with functional characteristics. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102: 2520–8.
6. Sanders DS, Carter MJ, Hurlstone DP, et al.: Association of adult
coeliac disease with irritable bowel syndrome: a case-control study
in patients fulfilling ROME II criteria referred to secondary care.
Lancet 2001; 358: 1504–8.
7. Ford AC, Chey WD, Talley NJ, et al.: Yield of diagnostic tests for
celiac disease in individuals with symptoms suggestive of irritable
bowel syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Intern
Med 2009; 169: 651–8.
8. Minderhoud IM, Oldenburg B, Wismeijer JA, et al.: IBS-like symptoms in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in remission;
relationships with quality of life and coping behavior. Dig Dis Sci
2004; 49: 469–74.
9. Goff BA, Mandel LS, Melancon CH, et al.: Frequency of symptoms
of ovarian cancer in women presenting to primary care clinics.
JAMA 2004; 291: 2705–12.
10. Goff BA, Mandel LS, Drescher CW, et al.: Development of an ovarian
cancer symptom index: possibilities for earlier detection. Cancer
2007; 109: 221–7.
11. Hamilton W, Peters TJ, Bankhead C, et al.: Risk of ovarian cancer in
women with symptoms in primary care: population based casecontrol study. BMJ 2009; 339: b2998.
12. Keller J, Wedel T, Seidl H, et al.: S3-Leitlinie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS) und der
Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurogastroenterologie und Motilität
(DGNM) zu Definition, Pathophysiologie, Diagnostik und Therapie intestinaler Motilitätsstörungen (AWMF-Registriernummer: 021/018).
Z Gastroenterol 2011; 49: 374–90.
13. Owens DM, Nelson DK, Talley NJ: The irritable bowel syndrome:
long-term prognosis and the physician-patient interaction. Ann
Intern Med 1995; 122: 107–12.
14. Moayyedi P, Ford AC, Talley NJ, et al.: The efficacy of probiotics in
the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review.
Gut 2010; 59: 325–32.
15. McFarland LV, Dublin S: Meta-analysis of probiotics for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. World J Gastroenterol 2008; 14:
2650–61.
16. Quartero AO, Meineche-Schmidt V, Muris J, et al.: Bulking agents,
antispasmodic and antidepressant medication for the treatment of
irritable bowel syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
2005CD003460.
17. Ford AC, Talley NJ, Schoenfeld PS, et al.: Efficacy of antidepressants and psychological therapies in irritable bowel syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut 2009; 58: 367–78.
18. Ford AC, Talley NJ, Spiegel BM, et al.: Effect of fibre, antispasmodics, and peppermint oil in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2008; 337:
a2313.
19. Andresen V, Montori VM, Keller J, et al.: Effects of 5-hydroxytryptamine (serotonin) type 3 antagonists on symptom relief and constipation in nonconstipated irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic
review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 6: 545–55.
20. Pimentel M, Lembo A, Chey WD, et al.: Rifaximin therapy for patients with irritable bowel syndrome without constipation. N Engl J
Med 2011; 364: 22–32.
21. Chang L, Tong K, Ameen V: Ischemic colitis and complications of
constipation associated with the use of alosetron under a risk
759
MEDICINE
management plan: clinical characteristics, outcomes, and incidences. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 866–75.
22. Camilleri M, Kerstens R, Rykx A, et al.: A placebo-controlled trial of
prucalopride for severe chronic constipation. N Engl J Med 2008;
358: 2344–54.
23. Ford AC, Brandt LJ, Young C, et al.: Efficacy of 5-HT3 antagonists
and 5-HT4 agonists in irritable bowel syndrome: systematic review
and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 1831–43; quiz
1844.
24. Johnston JM, Kurtz CB, Macdougall JE, et al.: Linaclotide improves
abdominal pain and bowel habits in a phase IIb study of patients
with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation. Gastroenterology
2010; 139: 1877–1886 e2.
25. Hoveyda N, Heneghan C, Mahtani KR, et al.: A systematic review
and meta-analysis: probiotics in the treatment of irritable bowel
syndrome. BMC Gastroenterol 2009; 9: 15.
Corresponding author
Dr. med. Viola Andresen
Israelitisches Krankenhaus
Medizinische Klinik
22297 Hamburg, Germany
v.andresen@ik-h.de
Permission
The elements eBox 1, Table 2, Figure 1 and Table 3 are reproduced with the
permission of Georg Thieme Verlag KG, Stuttgart, from: Layer P, Andresen V,
Pehl C, Allescher H, Bischoff S C, Claßen M, Enck P, Frieling T, Haag S, Holtmann G, Karaus M, Kathemann S, Keller J, Kuhlbusch-Zicklam R, Kruis W,
Langhorst J, Matthes H, Mönnikes H, Müller-Lissner S, Musial F, Otto B, Rosenberger C, Schemann M, van der Voort I, Dathe K, Preiß J C: S3-Leitlinie Reizdarmsyndrom: Definition, Pathophysiologie, Diagnostik und Therapie. Gemeinsame Leitlinie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurogastroenterologie und Motilität (DGNM): Irritable Bowel Syndrome: German Consensus Guidelines on Definition, Pathophysiology and Management.
Z Gastroenterol 2011; 49(2): 237–93.
@
For eReferences please refer to:
www.aerzteblatt-international.de/ref4411
eBoxes:
www.aerzteblatt-international.de/11m0751
760
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44): 751–60
MEDICINE
CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE
Irritable Bowel Syndrome—The Main
Recommendations
Viola Andresen, Jutta Keller, Christian Pehl, Michael Schemann, Jan Preiss, Peter Layer
eReferences
e1. Longstreth GF, Thompson WG, Chey WD, et al.: Functional bowel
disorders. Gastroenterology 2006; 130: 1480–91.
e2. O’Leary C, Wieneke P, Buckley S, et al.: Celiac disease and irritable bowel-type symptoms. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97:
1463–7.
e3. Vine MF, Calingaert B, Berchuck A, et al.: Characterization of prediagnostic symptoms among primary epithelial ovarian cancer
cases and controls. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 90: 75–82.
e4. Friedman GD, Skilling JS, Udaltsova NV, et al.: Early symptoms of
ovarian cancer: a case-control study without recall bias. Fam
Pract 2005; 22: 548–53.
e5. Lim B, Manheimer E, Lao L, et al.: Acupuncture for treatment of
irritable bowel syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
2006CD005111.
e6. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence N: Clinical
Practice Guideline on Irritable Bowel Syndrome in adults: Diagnosis and management of irritable bowel syndrome in primary
care. www.nice.org.uk, 2008.
e7. Schafer E, Ewe K: [The treatment of irritable colon. Efficacy and
tolerance of buscopan plus, buscopan, paracetamol and placebo
in ambulatory patients with irritable colon]. Fortschr Med 1990;
108: 488–92.
e8. Efskind PS, Bernklev T, Vatn MH: A double-blind placebo-controlled trial with loperamide in irritable bowel syndrome. Scand J
Gastroenterol 1996; 31: 463–8.
e9. Khoshoo V, Armstead C, Landry L: Effect of a laxative with and
without tegaserod in adolescents with constipation predominant
irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2006; 23:
191–6.
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44) | Andresen et al.: eReferences
I
MEDICINE
CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE
Irritable Bowel Syndrome—The Main
Recommendations
Viola Andresen, Jutta Keller, Christian Pehl, Michael Schemann, Jan Preiss, Peter Layer
eBOX 1
Members of the guideline group
● Participating medical specialist societies
Coordination
– German Society for Digestive and Metabolic Diseases (DGVS, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten)
in coordination with
– German Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (DGNM, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurogastroenterologie & Motilität
In collaboration with
– German Society for Internal Medicine (DGIM, Deutsche Gesellschaft
für Innere Medizin)
– Association of German Gastroenterologists in Private Practice (bng,
Berufsverband Niedergelassener Gastroenterologen)
– Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition (GPGE, Gesellschaft für Pädiatrische Gastroenterologie und Ernährung)
– German Society for Nutritional Medicine (DGEM, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährungsmedizin)
– German Society for General and Visceral Surgery (DGAV, Deutsche
Gesellschaft für Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie)
– German College of General Practitioners and Family Physicians (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allgemein- und Familienmedizin)
– German Society for the Study of Pain (DGSS, Deutsche Gesellschaft
zum Studium des Schmerzes)
– German Society for Behavioral Medicine and Behavior Modification
(DGVM, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Verhaltensmedizin und Verhaltensmodifikation)
– German Society of Psychosomatic Medicine and Medical Psychotherapy (DGPM, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychosomatische Medizin
und Ärztliche Psychotherapie)
– German Society for Tropical Medicine and International Health (DTG,
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Tropenmedizin und Internationale Gesundheit)
– German Society for Naturopathy (Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Naturheilkunde)
– German Irritable Bowel Self-Help (Deutsche Reizdarmselbsthilfe e. V.) (patient organization)
● Leading authors of the guideline
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Prof. Dr. med. Peter Layer, Hamburg
Dr. MSc Viola Andresen, Hamburg
PD Dr. med. Christian Pehl, Vilsbiburg
Prof. Dr. med. Hans-Dieter Allescher, Garmisch-Partenkirchen
Prof. Dr. med. Stephan C. Bischoff, Stuttgart
Dr. med. Martin Claßen, Bremen
Prof. Dr. med. Paul Enck, Tübingen
Prof. Dr. med. Thomas Frieling, Krefeld
Dr. MSc Sebastian Haag, Essen
Prof. Dr. med. Gerald Holtmann, Adelaide
Prof. Dr. med. Michael Karaus, Göttingen
Dr. med. Simone Kathemann, Essen
Dr. med. Jutta Keller, Hamburg
Dipl.-Psych. Rita Kuhlbusch-Zicklam, Krefeld
Prof. Dr. med. Wolfgang Kruis, Cologne
PD Dr. med. Jost Langhorst, Essen
Dr. med. Harald Matthes, Havelhöhe
Prof. Dr. med. Hubert Mönnikes, Berlin
Prof. Dr. med. Stefan Müller-Lissner, Berlin
PD Dr. med. Frauke Musial, Essen
PD Dr. med. Bärbel Otto, Munich
Dr. med. Christine Rosenberger, Hamburg
Prof. Dr. med. Michael Schemann, Munich
Dr. med. Ivo van der Voort, Berlin
PD Dr. med. Katarina Dathe, Berlin
Dr. med. Jan Preiss, Berlin
Permission:
Reproduced with the permission of Georg Thieme Verlag KG, Stuttgart from: Layer P, Andresen V, Pehl C, Allescher H, Bischoff S C, Classen M, Enck P, Frieling T, Haag S, Holtmann G, Karaus
M, Kathemann S, Keller J, Kuhlbusch-Zicklam R, Kruis W, Langhorst J,Matthes H, Mönnikes H, Müller-Lissner S, Musial F, Otto B, Rosenberger C, Schemann M, van der Voort I, Dathe K, Preiss
J C: S3-Leitlinie Reizdarmsyndrom: Definition, Pathophysiologie, Diagnostik und Therapie. Gemeinsame Leitlinie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten
(DGVS) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurogastroenterologie undMotilität (DGNM): Irritable Bowel Syndrome: German Consensus Guidelines on Definition, Pathophysiology and
Management. Z Gastroenterol 2011; 49(2): 237–93.
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44) | Andresen et al.: eBoxes
I
MEDICINE
eBOX 2
Example of a literature search
(working group on treatment of constipation and bloating in IBS)
● Basic search
((“Colonic Diseases, Functional”[MeSH] NOT “Colonic Pseudo-Obstruction”[MeSH]) OR “functional bowel” OR (“functional
gastrointestinal” NOT “dyspepsia”[MeSH]) OR bloat* OR flatulence OR “irritable bowel” OR “functional constipation” OR
“functional abdominal pain” OR “functional diarrhoea” OR “functional diarrhea”)((((( OR dyspepsia ))))) {working groups 4, 6
and 9} AND ((German[LA] OR English[LA]) NOT (letter[PT] OR editorial[PT] OR historical article[PT] OR comment[PT] OR
case reports[PT]) NOT (animals[MeSH] NOT humans[MeSH])) AND 1 : 2008/09/30[PDAT])) AND (systematic[SB] OR
(randomized controlled trial[PT] OR controlled clinical trial[PT] OR (clinical trial[PT] OR randomized[TIAB] OR placebo[TIAB]
OR dt[SH] OR randomly[TIAB] OR trial[TI] OR groups[TIAB]OR (epidemiologic studies[MeSH] OR “case control studies”[MeSH] OR “cohort studies”[MeSH] OR case control[TW] OR (cohort[TW] AND (study[TW] OR studies[TW])) OR Cohort
analy*[TW] OR (follow up[TW] AND (study[TW] OR studies[TW])) OR (observational[TW] AND (study[TW] OR studies[TW]))
OR longitudinal[TW] OR retrospective[TW] OR cross sectional[TW] OR “cross sectional studies”[MeSH]) OR ((economic[TIAB]
AND (evaluation* OR analys*)) OR pharmacoeconomi* OR health economi* OR cost benefit* OR cost containment* OR cost
effective* OR cost minimi* OR cost utilit* OR “costs and cost analysis”[MeSH] OR “economics”[MeSH]))
● Sample specific search strategy (working group 8, treatment of constipation and bloating in IBS) linked to the
above basic search
“Complementary Therapies”[Mesh] OR “Neurotransmitter Agents”[Mesh] OR “Serotonin Antagonists”[Mesh] OR “Receptors,
Serotonin, 5-HT4”[Mesh] OR “ATI 7505 “[Substance Name] OR “Receptors, Adrenergic, alpha-2”[Mesh] OR “Clonidine”[Mesh]
OR “Somatostatin”[Mesh] OR “Octreotide”[Mesh] OR “alvimopan” [Substance Name] OR “Receptors, Opioid”[Mesh] OR “Receptors, Corticotropin-Releasing Hormone”[Mesh] OR “lubiprostone” [Substance Name] OR “Cholecystokinin”[Mesh] OR “MEN
11420” [Substance Name] OR “SR 48968” [Substance Name] OR “dexloxiglumide” [Substance Name] OR “Cholinergic Antagonists” [Mesh] OR “Muscarinic Antagonists”[Mesh] OR “Antidiarrheals”[Mesh] OR “Loperamide”[Mesh] OR “Loperamide”[Mesh] OR “Benzodiazepines”[Mesh] OR “Anti-Bacterial Agents”[Mesh] OR “Neomycin”[Mesh])OR “Probiotics”[Mesh] OR
“Parasympatholytics”[Mesh] OR “Dicyclomine”[Mesh] OR “Trimebutine”[Mesh] OR “Dicyclomine”[Mesh] OR “mebeverine”
[Substance Name] OR “DA 3177” [Substance Name] OR “octylonium” [Substance Name] OR “pinaverium” [Substance Name]
OR “Desipramine”[Mesh] OR “Amitriptyline”[Mesh] OR “Doxepin”[Mesh] OR “Trimipramine”[Mesh])OR “Mianserin”[Mesh] OR
“Paroxetine”[Mesh] OR “Citalopram”[Mesh] OR “Antidepressive Agents”[Mesh] OR “Dietary Fiber”[Mesh] OR “Psyllium”[Mesh]
OR “Enema/therapy”[Mesh] OR “Laxatives”[Mesh]
● Number of publications
Basic search: 5573
Linked to the working group 8 strategy: 1103
After selection according to content and method: 62
II
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International | Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(44) | Andresen et al.: eBoxes