Tu2057 Assessment of Bowel Symptoms, Colonic Transit, and the Relationship to Fecal Bile Acid (BA) Excretion in Health and Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS)

Abstract

Background: Idiopathic bile acid malabsorption (BAM) causes chronic diarrhea and BA deficiency may cause constipation. BA supplementation and an ileal BA transporter inhibitor, elobixibat, accelerate colonic transit (CT). Rectal infusion of BA (e.g. chenodeoxycholate) induces colonic propulsive motility. Up to 50% of patients with IBS-D have accelerated CT; 20% of patients with IBS-C have delayed CT. The relationship between fecal BA excretion, CT, and bowel symptoms in IBS is unclear and may be relevant to selecting optimal therapy. Aim: To assess stool frequency (number) and consistency (form) in relation to CT and fecal BA excretion in healthy participants and patients with IBS-C and IBS-D. Methods: In a prospective study of 92 participants (31 healthy, 30 IBS-C and 31 IBS-D by Rome III criteria), we measured total and individual fecal BA and fecal fat (on 100g fat diet), overall CT by validated scintigraphy (geometric center, GC at 24 and 48h) and stool characteristics by a 14 day bowel pattern diary including Bristol stool form scale. Univariate associations between endpoints were assessed using Spearman correlation (rs). Relationships between stool characteristics, CT and fecal BA excretion were assessed using response surface multiple regression models (which included BMI as a covariate and linear, quadratic and cross product terms for the CT and BA measurements). Results: 1. There were significant univariate associations (table showing rs) between stool number and stool form and total fecal BA (including % LCA, % CDCA, and % CA), fecal fat, and GC24 and 48. 2. The response surface model for stool number (figure left panel) with total fecal BA and CT (GC24 ) explained 29% of the variation (r=0.54, p,0.001); similarly, the model for stool form (figure middle panel) with fecal BA and CT (GC24) explained 20% of the variation (r=0.45, p=0.021). Using total secretory BA (CA+DCA+CDCA), the response surface model for stool form (figure right panel) explained 23% of the variation (r=0.49, p=0.006). In these models, the relative contribution of CT was consistently greater than that for BA, with the coefficients corresponding to CT being statistically significant (p,0.05), while those for BA were borderline (e.g. p=0.073 for the coefficient for secretory BA and stool form, and p=0.227 for stool number). Conclusion: Relative to fecal BA, colonic transit is the greater determinant of stool number and stool form; increased total and secretory fecal BA enhance the effects of colon transit on stool characteristics, but are not independently significant factors. Funding:NIHDK92179