Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2025
Evacuation Dysfunction Does Not Impact Breath Test Results.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Soetaert Céline, Itani Mohamad, Triadafilopoulos George, Spencer Sean, Nguyen Linda, Neshatian Leila
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Evacuation dysfunction affects gastrointestinal motility, yet its effect on small bowel microbiota is unknown. We aimed to compare the glucose breath test (GBT) and lactulose breath test (LBT) outcomes in patients with or without evacuation dysfunction based on high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) and balloon expulsion test (BET).
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who received a HR-ARM and either a GBT or LBT from 2018 to 2024.
KEY RESULTS: We studied 344 patients who underwent GBT and 144 who underwent LBT. Clinical characteristics between the two groups were comparable. Abnormal BET was observed in 53% of patients. Rates of abnormal breath tests were comparable among patients with or without abnormal BET. Patients with positive vs. negative breath tests had similar anorectal pressures, rectal sensory function, and BET results. There were significantly more negative breath tests in GBT (64%) versus LBT (35%), with higher rates of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) in LBT versus GBT (SIBO only: 20.1% vs. 7.6%; SIBO+IMO: 21.5% vs. 5.5%; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: The presence of evacuation dysfunction does not impact the results of the breath test. HR-ARM and BET demonstrate a high diagnostic yield in identifying the etiology of abdominal bloating in patients with chronic constipation or IBS without diarrhea, whereas hydrogen breath tests have a low diagnostic yield in this context. The specificity and sensitivity of LBT in this patient population remain less certain.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who received a HR-ARM and either a GBT or LBT from 2018 to 2024.
KEY RESULTS: We studied 344 patients who underwent GBT and 144 who underwent LBT. Clinical characteristics between the two groups were comparable. Abnormal BET was observed in 53% of patients. Rates of abnormal breath tests were comparable among patients with or without abnormal BET. Patients with positive vs. negative breath tests had similar anorectal pressures, rectal sensory function, and BET results. There were significantly more negative breath tests in GBT (64%) versus LBT (35%), with higher rates of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) in LBT versus GBT (SIBO only: 20.1% vs. 7.6%; SIBO+IMO: 21.5% vs. 5.5%; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: The presence of evacuation dysfunction does not impact the results of the breath test. HR-ARM and BET demonstrate a high diagnostic yield in identifying the etiology of abdominal bloating in patients with chronic constipation or IBS without diarrhea, whereas hydrogen breath tests have a low diagnostic yield in this context. The specificity and sensitivity of LBT in this patient population remain less certain.