scholarly journals Classification of pediatric functional gastrointestinal disorders related to abdominal pain using Rome III vs. Rome IV criterions

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Trent Edwards ◽  
Craig Friesen ◽  
Jennifer V. Schurman
Author(s):  
Desiree F. Baaleman ◽  
Carlos A. Velasco-Benítez ◽  
Laura M. Méndez-Guzmán ◽  
Marc A. Benninga ◽  
Miguel Saps

AbstractTo evaluate the agreement between the Rome III and Rome IV criteria in diagnosing pediatric functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs), we conducted a prospective cohort study in a public school in Cali, Colombia. Children and adolescents between 11 and 18 years of age were given the Spanish version of the Questionnaire on Pediatric Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders Rome III version on day 0 and Rome IV version on day 2 (48 h later). The study protocol was completed by 135 children. Thirty-nine (28.9%) children were excluded because of not following the instructions of the questionnaire. The final analysis included data of 96 children (mean 15.2 years old, SD ± 1.7, 54% girls). Less children fulfilled the criteria for an FGID according to Rome IV compared to Rome III (40.6% vs 29.2%, p=0.063) resulting in a minimal agreement between the two criteria in diagnosing an FGID (kappa 0.34, agreement of 70%). The prevalence of functional constipation according to Rome IV was significantly lower compared to Rome III (13.5% vs 31.3%, p<0.001), whereas functional dyspepsia had a higher prevalence according to Rome IV than Rome III (11.5% vs 0%).Conclusion: We found an overall minimal agreement in diagnosing FGIDs according to Rome III and Rome IV criteria. This may be partly explained by the differences in diagnostic criteria. However, limitations with the use of questionnaires to measure prevalence have to be taken into account. What is Known:• The Rome IV criteria replaced the previous Rome III criteria providing updated criteria to diagnose functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs).• Differences found between Rome IV and historic Rome III FGID prevalence may have been affected by changes in prevalence over time or differences in sample characteristics. What is New:• We found a minimal agreement between Rome III and Rome IV FGID diagnosis, especially in the diagnoses of functional constipation, irritable bowel syndrome, and functional dyspepsia.• The minimal agreement may be partly explained by changes in diagnostic criteria, but limitations with the use of questionnaires to measure prevalence have to be taken into account.


2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 686-e511 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Bouchoucha ◽  
M. Fysekidis ◽  
G. Devroede ◽  
J. -J. Raynaud ◽  
B. Bejou ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 199 ◽  
pp. 212-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel Saps ◽  
Carlos Alberto Velasco-Benitez ◽  
Amber Hamid Langshaw ◽  
Carmen Rosy Ramírez-Hernández

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Tosto ◽  
Paola D’Andrea ◽  
Ignazio Salamone ◽  
Salvatore Pellegrino ◽  
Stefano Costa ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Rome IV criteria for functional gastrointestinal disorders state that children suspected of having Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) with Constipation (IBS-C) should be preliminarily treated for constipation. We aimed at verifying if functional constipation may indeed lead to an erroneous diagnosis of IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D) or IBS with mixed pattern of diarrhea and constipation (IBS-M).Methods We prospectively enrolled in an unblinded fashion 10 and 16 consecutive children referred to our center who met Rome IV criteria for a diagnosis of IBS-D and IBS-M, respectively. Patients who fulfilled criteria for suspect “occult constipation” were then given a bowel cleaning regimen with PEG 3350, re-evaluated at 2 months and followed up for at least 6 months. Sixteen additional patients with IBS with Constipation (IBS-C) referred in the same period served as control. The endpoints were: 1) a decrease of more than 50% in abdominal pain intensity and frequency scores; and 2) for patients with IBS-D and IBS-M: resolution of diarrhea.Results The endpoints were met by 8 (80%) and 14 (87%) of the patients with IBS-D and IBS-M, respectively, with decrease of abdominal pain and resolution of “diarrhea”. The response was not significantly different from that observed in 15 (93%) of the IBS-C control group.Conclusion acknowledging the limitations of the small number of patients and of the uncontrolled nature of the study, we suggest that a possibly large number of patients labeled as IBS-D or IBS-M may actually simply present functional constipation and should be managed as such.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document