AIM: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of mixed soluble/insoluble fibre vs. psyllium in a randomized double-blind controlled trial.
METHODS: Constipated patients (Rome III) received mixed fibre or psyllium, 5 g b.d., for 4 weeks. Daily symptoms and stool habit were assessed using stool diary. Subjects with ≥1 complete spontaneous bowel movement/week above baseline for ≥2/4 weeks were considered responders. Secondary outcome measures included stool consistency, bowel satisfaction, straining, gas, bloating, taste, dissolvability and quality of life (QoL).
RESULTS: Seventy-two subjects (mixed fibre = 40; psyllium = 32) were enrolled and two from psyllium group withdrew. The mean complete spontaneous bowel movement/week increased with both mixed fibre (P < 0.0001) and psyllium (P = 0.0002) without group difference. There were 30 (75%) responders with mixed fibre and 24 (75%) with psyllium (P = 0.9). Stool consistency increased (P = 0.04), straining (P = 0.006) and bloating scores decreased (P = 0.02) without group differences. Significantly more patients reported improvement in flatulence (53% vs. 25%, P = 0.01) and felt that mixed fibre dissolved better (P = 0.02) compared to psyllium. QoL improved (P = 0.0125) with both treatments without group differences.
CONCLUSIONS: Mixed fibre and psyllium were equally efficacious in improving constipation and QoL. Mixed fibre was more effective in relieving flatulence, bloating and dissolved better. Mixed fibre is effective and well tolerated.
DESIGN: 1805 consecutive unselected patients with FGID who presented for primary or secondary care to 11 centres across Asia completed a cultural and linguistic adaptation of the Rome III Diagnostic Questionnaire that was translated to the local languages. Principal components factor analysis with varimax rotation was used to identify symptom clusters.
RESULTS: Nine symptom clusters were identified, consisting of two oesophageal factors (F6: globus, odynophagia and dysphagia; F9: chest pain and heartburn), two gastroduodenal factors (F5: bloating, fullness, belching and flatulence; F8 regurgitation, nausea and vomiting), three bowel factors (F2: abdominal pain and diarrhoea; F3: meal-related bowel symptoms; F7: upper abdominal pain and constipation) and two anorectal factors (F1: anorectal pain and constipation; F4: diarrhoea, urgency and incontinence).
CONCLUSION: We found that the broad categorisation used both in clinical practice and in the Rome system, that is, broad anatomical divisions, and certain diagnoses with long historical records, that is, IBS with diarrhoea, and chronic constipation, are still valid in our Asian societies. In addition, we found a bowel symptom cluster with meal trigger and a gas cluster that suggests a different emphasis in our populations. Future studies to compare a non-Asian cohort and to match to putative pathophysiology will help to verify our findings.