4.7 Review

The Efficacy of Mebeverine in the Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome-A Systematic Review

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11041044

Keywords

irritable bowel syndrome; mebeverine; systematic review

Funding

  1. Mylan Healthcare Sp. z o. o

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mebeverine has shown significant efficacy in treating irritable bowel syndrome, particularly in reducing abdominal pain and improving related symptoms. It has a good safety profile with minimal adverse effects.
Background: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal tract disorder, affecting 10-20% of adults worldwide. Mebeverine is an antispasmodic agent indicated for the symptomatic treatment of abdominal pain caused by intestinal smooth muscle spasms and intestinal functional disorders in the course of IBS. The aim of this article was to perform a systematic literature review and update previous overviews of the efficacy and safety of mebeverine treatment in IBS. Methods: Major electronic medical databases, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane, were systematically searched from January 1965 to January 2021. Results: Twenty-two studies met our inclusion criteria, including 19 randomised trials, two observational retrospective studies, and one non-randomised, single-blinded study. Six studies reported a significant decrease in abdominal pain after mebeverine treatment (p-values ranging from <0.05 to <0.001). Only three studies showed no improvement after mebeverine treatment in terms of the severity of abdominal pain or discomfort. Some of the included studies also showed significant improvements in abnormal bowel habits, abdominal distension, as well as stool frequency and consistency. Adverse events were rare and associated mainly with IBS symptoms. Conclusions: Mebeverine is an effective treatment option in IBS, with a good safety profile and low frequency of adverse effects.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available