BackgroundThere was no available data concerning the clinical differentiation between the updated definition of early chronic pancreatitis (ECP) and anti-acid therapy-resistant functional dyspepsia (RFD).AimsWe aimed to determine whether clinical symptoms, gastric motility, psychogenic factors and fat intake can help distinguish early chronic pancreatitis (ECP) from anti-acid therapy-resistant functional dyspepsia patients with pancreatic enzyme abnormalities (RFD-P) and anti-acid therapy-resistant functional dyspepsia (RFD) patients using endosonography.MethodsWe enrolled 102 consecutive patients presenting with typical symptoms of RFD patients (n = 52), ECP patients (n = 25) and RFD-P patients (n = 25). ECP patients were diagnosed based on the criteria recommended by the Japan Pancreatic Association. Gastric motility was evaluated by 13C-acetate breath tests. Severity of duodenal inflammation was examined.Results24.5% of RFD patients were determined as ECP using endosonography. Abdominal pain score in Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) in the patients with ECP was significantly lower compared to that in the patients with RFD-P. There were no significant differences in State-Trait Inventory (STAI)-state/-trait scores, Self-Rating Questionnaire for Depression (SRQ-D) scores and clinical symptoms for fat intake among three groups. The early phase of gastric emptying (AUC5; AUC15) in ECP and RFD-P patients were significantly disturbed compared to those in RFD patients.ConclusionsEvaluation of severity of abdominal pain and measurement of the early phase of gastric emptying will be useful tools to distinguish ECP patients from RFD patients. Accurate diagnosis of ECP patients may contribute to the prevention from advancing of chronic pancreatitis.

Abstract:Patients with functional dyspepsia, defined in the 2016 Rome IV criteria as bothersome clinical dyspepsia symptoms, experience markedly reduced quality of life. Several etiologies have been associated with the disorder. In the Rome IV criteria, the brain-gut axis was acknowledged as an important factor in the etiology of functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorders. The distinct subgroups of functional dyspepsia, epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) and postprandial distress syndrome (PDS), are treated differently: acid secretion inhibitors are recommended with patients with EPS, whereas prokinetic drugs as mosapride and acotiamide are recommended for patients with PDS. A previous study has reported that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and H 2 -blockers were equally effective in functional dyspepsia. A new drug, acotiamide, a muscarinic antagonist and cholinesterase inhibitor, has been shown to improve gastric motility in rodents and dogs, and to reduce PDS symptoms in patients in doubleblind multicenter studies. The pharmacological mechanisms of acotiamide remain unknown; whether acotiamide alters gastric emptying and gastric accommodation in patients with functional dyspepsia remains an open question. Other emerging treatment options include Rikkunshito, a herbal medicine that improves gastric emptying through 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)2B-mediated pharmacological action, and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). Different drugs are needed to accommodate the clinical symptoms and etiology in individual patients.

There was not available data about the overlap between functional dyspepsia (FD) and pancreatic diseases. We aimed to determine whether epigastric pain syndrome (EPS) accompanying with pancreatic enzyme abnormalities were associated with early chronic pancreatitis proposed by Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) using endosonography. We enrolled 99 consecutive patients presenting with typical symptoms of FD, including patients with postprandial distress syndrome (PDS) (n = 59), EPS with pancreatic enzyme abnormalities (n = 41) and EPS without pancreatic enzyme abnormalities (n = 42) based on Rome III criteria. Gastric motility was evaluated using the 13C-acetate breath test. Early chronic pancreatitis was detected by endosonography and graded from 0 to 7. The ratio of female patients among EPS patients (34/41) with pancreatic enzyme abnormalities was significantly (p = 0.0018) higher than the ratio of female EPS patients (20/42) without it. Postprandial abdominal distention and physical component summary (PCS) scores in EPS patients with pancreatic enzyme abnormalities were significantly disturbed compared to those in EPS patients without it. Interestingly, AUC5 and AUC15 values (24.85 ± 1.31 and 56.11 ± 2.51, respectively) in EPS patients with pancreatic enzyme abnormalities were also significantly (p = 0.002 and p = 0.001, respectively) increased compared to those (19.75 ± 1.01 and 47.02 ± 1.99, respectively) in EPS patients without it. Overall, 64% of EPS patients with pancreatic enzyme abnormalities were diagnosed by endosonography as having concomitant early chronic pancreatitis proposed by JPS. Further studies are warranted to clarify how EPS patients with pancreatic enzyme abnormalities were associated with early chronic pancreatitis proposed by JPS.

Background/Aims: The aims of the study are to clarify the pathophysiological differences among early chronic pancreatitis (ECP), functional dyspepsia with pancreatic (FD-P) enzyme abnormalities and FD patients and to determine whether camostat mesilate, pancrelipase, and rabeprazole triple therapy improve FD symptoms in the ECP patients and FD-P patients in cross-over way. Methods: We enrolled 84 consecutive patients presenting with typical symptoms of FD patients (n = 42), ECP patients (n = 15), and FD-P patients (n = 27). Gastric emptying was assessed by the ¹³C-acetate breath test. ECP was diagnosed based on the criteria recommended by the Japan Pancreatic Association. Results: The proportions of female in ECP patients and FD-P were significantly higher compared to that in FD patients. The early phase of gastric emptying in ECP and FD-P patients was significantly disturbed compared to that in FD patients. The primary outcome of this study is that 4 weeks of camostat mesilate, pancrelipase, and rabeprazole triple therapy significantly ameliorated epigastric pain in ECP patients compared to acotiamide and rabeprazole combination therapy. Conclusion: Although there were no significant differences in pathophysiology between ECP patients and FD-P patients, triple therapy can significantly ameliorate epigastric pain in ECP patients. Further studies will be needed to clarify why triple therapy can improve epigastric pain in ECP patients.

No abstract