Previous studies have confirmed that acupuncture for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) provided an additional benefit over usual care alone. Therefore, we performed a multicenter, randomized, sham-controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of acupuncture versus sham acupuncture for refractory IBS in patients in the context of conventional treatments. Patients in the acupuncture and sham acupuncture groups received real or sham acupuncture treatment in 3 sessions per week for a total of 12 sessions. The primary outcome was a change in the IBS-Symptom Severity Scale (IBS-SSS) score from baseline to week 4. A total of 521 participants were screened, and 170 patients (85 patients per group) were enrolled and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Baseline characteristics were comparable across the two groups. From baseline to 4 weeks, the IBS-SSS total score decreased by 140.0 (95% CI: 126.0 to 153.9) in the acupuncture group and 64.4 (95% CI: 50.4 to 78.3) in the sham acupuncture group. The between-group difference was 75.6 (95% CI: 55.8 to 95.4). Acupuncture efficacy was maintained during the 4-week follow-up period. There were no serious adverse events. In conclusion, acupuncture provided benefits when combined with treatment as usual, providing more options for the treatment of refractory IBS.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common chronic gastrointestinal disease with a significant impact on patients' quality of life and a high socioeconomic burden. And the understanding of IBS has changed since the release of the Rome IV diagnosis in 2016. With the upcoming Rome V revision, it is necessary to review the results of IBS research in recent years. In this review of IBS, we can highlight future concerns by reviewing the results of IBS research on epidemiology, overlap disorders, pathophysiology, and treatment over the past decade and summarizing the latest research.

To estimate the magnitude of the nocebo response and explore its influencing factors in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to March 2021. We performed a random effects meta-analysis of the proportion of adverse events (AEs) in placebo-treated patients with IBS who are involved in parallel-designed, randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating pharmacological interventions and evaluated the effect of trial characteristics on the magnitude of the nocebo response rate.

A total of 6,107 studies were identified from the databases. After evaluation, 53 met the eligibility criteria and were included. The overall pooled nocebo response rate was 32% (95% CI: 26-38%). The most commonly reported AEs were headache (9%), nasopharyngitis (7%), abdominal pain (4%), and nausea (4%). The nocebo response rate was low compared with that in the treatment group applying probiotics, antispasmodics, and Traditional Chinese medicine, but high compared with that in antibiotic treatment group. The nocebo rate in patients using diaries to record AEs was lower than the average, and was higher in patients recording through checkup.

Patients with IBS have significant nocebo response intensity in clinical trials. Based on findings in this study, we recommend the researchers pay attention to the common AEs and carefully analyze the relation to the intervention.

Chronic abdominal pain is a common gastrointestinal (GI) symptom that characterizes many functional GI disorders/disorders of gut-brain interaction, including irritable bowel syndrome, functional dyspepsia, and centrally mediated abdominal pain syndrome. The symptoms of abdominal pain in these highly prevalent disorders are often treated with antispasmodic agents. Antispasmodic treatment includes a broad range of therapeutic classes with different mechanisms of action, including anticholinergic/antimuscarinic agents (inhibition of GI smooth muscle contraction), calcium channel inhibitors (inhibition of calcium transport into GI smooth muscle), and direct smooth muscle relaxants (inhibition of sodium and calcium transport). The aim of this review article was to examine the efficacy and safety of antispasmodics available in North America (e.g., alverine, dicyclomine, hyoscine, hyoscyamine, mebeverine, otilonium, pinaverium, and trimebutine) for the treatment of chronic abdominal pain in patients with common disorders of gut-brain interaction. For the agents examined, comparisons of studies are limited by inconsistencies in treatment dosing and duration, patient profiles, and diagnostic criteria employed. Furthermore, variability in study end points limits comparisons. Risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, and reporting bias also differed among studies, and in many cases, risks were considered "unclear." The antispasmodics evaluated in this review, which differ in geographic availability, were found to vary dramatically in efficacy and safety. Given these caveats, each agent should be considered on an individual basis, rather than prescribed based on information across the broad class of agents.

Conventional and herbal drugs are frequently used together to treat many disorders. Samryungbaekchul-san (SRS, a herbal formula) and otilonium bromide (OB, an antispasmodic agent) are widely used to treat diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (D-IBS) in Eastern Asian countries. However, there have been no studies on the co-administration of SRS and OB. Therefore, we aimed to preliminarily assess the feasibility of SRS combined with OB for D-IBS treatment in a pilot double-blind, four-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial (RCT), including 80 patients diagnosed with D-IBS according to the Rome III criteria. The patients were randomly assigned to four treatment groups and were administered drugs for eight weeks after a two-week preparatory period. Follow-up was conducted four weeks after the administration period. The primary outcome was evaluated by using a global D-IBS symptom improvement score; no statistically significant difference was observed between the groups. However, multiple logistic regression analysis of primary outcome scores shows that SRS significantly improved D-IBS symptoms (p < 0.05). For secondary outcomes, better results were observed in the SRS + OB group, in terms of symptoms, including abdominal pain, discomfort, frequency of abdominal pain, and stool form than in OB alone or placebo groups (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the co-administration of SRS and OB might be an effective and safe strategy for the treatment of D-IBS. Large-scale RCTs are warranted to further confirm and clarify these findings.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), known as a functional and organic gastrointestinal disorder, is a collection of symptoms that occur together and generally include pain or discomfort in the abdomen and changes in bowel movement patterns. Due to the limitations of conventional treatments, alternative IBS treatments are used by many patients worldwide. Samryungbaekchulsan (SRS), a herbal formula, has long been used for alleviating diarrhoea-predominant IBS (D-IBS) in traditional Korean medicine. Otilonium bromide (OB) is an antimuscarinic compound used to relieve spasmodic pain in the gut, especially in IBS. Although herbal formulae and Western drugs are commonly coadministered for various diseases in Korea, few clinical studies have been conducted regarding the synergic effects of these treatments for any disease, including D-IBS.

This trial is a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, double-dummy, four-arm, parallel study. After a 2-week preparation period, 80 patients with D-IBS will be randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups consisting of SRS (water extract granules, 5 g/pack, three times a day) with OB (tablet form, one capsule three times a day) or their placebos, with treatment lasting for 8 weeks. Post-treatment follow-up will be conducted 4 weeks after the end of treatment. The primary outcome is the finding obtained using the Subject's Global Assessment of Relief method. The secondary outcomes are the severity of symptoms related to D-IBS, determined using a 10-point scale, and the change in symptoms.

This trial has full ethical approval of the Ethics Committee of Catholic Kwandong University International St. Mary's Hospital (IS15MISV0033) and the Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (30769). The results of the study will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and/or conference presentations.

IS15MISV0033 version 4.0 (25 July 2016).

KCT0001621 (approval date: 10 August 2015).

Otilonium bromide (OB) is a spasmolytic agent acting as an L-type calcium channel antagonist in intestinal and colonic smooth muscle cells (SMCs). We analyzed three independent clinical trials with homogeneous design on patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). After 2 weeks receiving placebo, patients were randomized to receive OB (3 × 40 mg daily) or placebo for 15 weeks. We aimed to perform a pooled analysis of the data from these homogeneous clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of OB treatment on symptoms and global response of patients.

A total of 883 patients with IBS (69.8% women, mean age 46.2 years, 43.8% mixed type) were included, 442 treated with OB and 441 with placebo. The efficacy results from the three studies at weeks 5, 10 and 15 were pooled in an intention-to-treat (ITT) strategy, analyzed with a logistic regression model and described by forest plots.

Despite a placebo effect in all efficacy variables, a significant therapeutic effect of OB was observed at weeks 10 and 15 with reference to: (a) intensity and frequency of abdominal pain; (b) rate of responders as evaluated by patients (71.8% at week 10 and 77.2% at week 15); (c) severity of bloating; (d) rate of responders as evaluated by physicians (55% at week 10 and 63.9% at week 15). No significant OB effect was observed in stool frequency and consistency.

OB is more effective than placebo in IBS treatment. Therapeutic benefits are significant after 10 weeks and are maximal after 15 weeks of treatment.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) affects about 15 % of the US population and results in significant morbidity and health care costs. There remains a significant unmet need for effective treatments particularly for the pain component of IBS and other functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). Progress made in our understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms such as the role of altered bile acid metabolism, neurohormonal regulation, immune dysfunction, the epithelial barrier and secretory properties of the gut has led to advancements in therapeutic armamentarium for IBS. This review discusses the new drugs for constipation and diarrhea-predominant IBS subtypes that have been tested or have been under investigation over the last 3-4 years. Overall, there is a promising pipeline of investigational drugs for the future treatment of IBS and related FGIDs.

Chronic diarrhea is usually associated with a number of non-infectious causes. When definitive treatment is unavailable, symptomatic drug therapy is indicated. Pharmacologic agents for chronic diarrhea include loperamide, 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, diosmectite, cholestyramine, probiotics, antispasmodics, rifaximin, and anti-inflammatory agents. Loperamide, a synthetic opiate agonist, decreases peristaltic activity and inhibits secretion, resulting in the reduction of fluid and electrolyte loss and an increase in stool consistency. Cholestyramine is a bile acid sequestrant that is generally considered as the first-line treatment for bile acid diarrhea. 5-HT3 receptor antagonists have significant benefits in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) with diarrhea. Ramosetron improves stool consistency as well as global IBS symptoms. Probiotics may have a role in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. However, data on the role of probiotics in the treatment of chronic diarrhea are lacking. Diosmectite, an absorbent, can be used for the treatment of chronic functional diarrhea, radiation-induced diarrhea, and chemotherapy-induced diarrhea. Antispasmodics including alverine citrate, mebeverine, otilonium bromide, and pinaverium bromide are used for relieving diarrheal symptoms and abdominal pain. Rifaximin can be effective for chronic diarrhea associated with IBS and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. Budesonide is effective in both lymphocytic colitis and collagenous colitis. The efficacy of mesalazine in microscopic colitis is weak or remains uncertain. Considering their mechanisms of action, these agents should be prescribed properly.