Article

Comparison of symptom response following advice for a diet low in fermentable carbohydrates (FODMAPs) versus standard dietary advice in patients with irritable bowel syndrome.

King's College London, Nutritional Sciences Division, London, UK.
Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics (Impact Factor: 2.07). 05/2011; 24(5):487-95. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-277X.2011.01162.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Emerging evidence indicates that the consumption of fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs) may result in symptoms in some patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The present study aimed to determine whether a low FODMAP diet is effective for symptom control in patients with IBS and to compare its effects with those of standard dietary advice based on the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines.
Consecutive patients with IBS who attended a follow-up dietetic outpatient visit for dietary management of their symptoms were included. Questionnaires were completed for patients who received standard (n = 39) or low FODMAP dietary advice (n = 43). Data were recorded on symptom change and comparisons were made between groups.
In total, more patients in the low FODMAP group reported satisfaction with their symptom response (76%) compared to the standard group (54%, P = 0.038). Composite symptom score data showed better overall symptom response in the low FODMAP group (86%) compared to the standard group (49%, P < 0.001). Significantly more patients in the low FODMAP group compared to the standard group reported improvements in bloating (low FODMAP 82% versus standard 49%, P = 0.002), abdominal pain (low FODMAP 85% versus standard 61%, P = 0.023) and flatulence (low FODMAP 87% versus standard 50%, P = 0.001).
A low FODMAP diet appears to be more effective than standard dietary advice for symptom control in IBS.

5 Bookmarks
 · 
348 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ingestion of food has long been linked with gut symptoms, and there is increasing interest in using diet in the management of patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The West has developed an intense interest in specialized, restrictive diets, such as those that target multiple food groups, avoid gluten, or reduce fermentable oligo-, di-, and mono-saccharides and polyols. However, most gastroenterologists are not well educated about diets or their effects on the gut. It is important to understand the various dietary approaches, their putative mechanisms, the evidence that supports their use, and the benefits or harm they might produce. The concepts behind and delivery of specialized diets differ from those of pharmacologic agents. High-quality research is needed to determine the efficacy of different dietary approaches and the place of specific strategies.
    Gastroenterology 02/2015; DOI:10.1053/j.gastro.2015.02.005 · 12.82 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a condition characterized by abdominal pain, bloating, flatus, and altered bowel habits. The role of dietary components in inducing IBS symptoms is difficult to explore. To date, foods are not considered a cause but rather symptom-triggering factors. Particular interest has been given to the so-called FODMAPs (fermentable oligo-, di-, and monosaccharides and polyols). We aimed to summarize the evidence from the most common approaches to manage suspected food intolerance in IBS, with a particular interest in the role of FODMAPs and the effects of a low FODMAP diet. We reviewed literature, consulting PubMed and Medline by using the search terms FODMAP(s), fructose, lactose, fructans, galactans, polyols (sorbitol, mannitol, maltitol, xylitol, erythritol, polydextrose, and isomalt), irritable bowel syndrome, and functional gastrointestinal symptoms. FODMAP-restricted diets have been used for a long time to manage patients with IBS. The innovation in the so-called FODMAP concept is that a global restriction should have a more consistent effect than a limited one in preventing abdominal distension. Even though all the potential low FODMAP diets provide good relief of symptoms in many patients, there is just a little relief in others. Several studies highlight the role of low FODMAP diets to improve symptoms in patients with IBS. The evidence on this dietary approach supports the hypothesis that a low FODMAP diet should be the first dietary approach. However, many points remain to be clarified, including the evaluation of possibly significant nutrition concerns. © 2015 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.
    Nutrition in Clinical Practice 02/2015; DOI:10.1177/0884533615569886 · 2.06 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Food is a recognized trigger for most patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). In recent years, an emerging evidence base has identified dietary manipulation as an important therapeutic approach in IBS. Original and review articles were identified through selective searches performed on PubMed and Google Scholar. Randomized controlled trials have supported the use of a diet that restricts a group of short-chain carbohydrates known collectively as fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs). There is evidence that specific probiotics may improve symptoms in IBS. The role of a high-fibre diet remains subject to ongoing debate with a lack of high-quality evidence. The long-term durability and safety of a low FODMAP diet are unclear. A paradigm shift has led to a focus on the relationship between diet and pathophysiological mechanisms in IBS such as effects on intestinal microbiota, inflammation, motility, permeability and visceral hypersensitivity. Future large, randomized controlled trials with rigorous end points are required. In addition, predictors of response need to be identified to offer personalized therapy. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
    British Medical Bulletin 01/2015; DOI:10.1093/bmb/ldu039 · 4.36 Impact Factor