The continuing dilemma of dyspepsia

Summary Dyspepsia drains a substantial proportion of healthcare resources in industrialized countries and an appropriate management strategy is needed. An aetiological role for Helicobacter pylori infection has been demonstrated in a number of pathological conditions associated with dyspepsia, such as peptic ulcer and gastric malignancies, but not in functional dyspepsia. Endoscopy and diagnosis‐based treatment, H. pylori testing and eradication therapy, history taking and empirical therapy, are the main tools that are currently available for managing patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms. Endoscopy identifies malignancies and organic diseases of the proximal gut and therefore provides reassurance to both doctors and patients. It should be recommended in older patients with suspicious symptoms and it has proven to be more cost‐effective than empirical H 2 ‐receptor antagonists in patients with ulcer‐like symptoms. Empirical eradication in all dyspeptics without suspicious symptoms is a cost‐effective approach that cures the majority of peptic ulcers. Nevertheless, it does not control symptoms in the majority of patients, it may exacerbate gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease, and it encourages antibiotic resistance. The realities of current clinical practice require empirical therapy in most, if not all, the dyspeptics seen by general practitioners. A detailed history taking can help to diagnose gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease and to identify suspicious symptoms. Furthermore, identification of dyspepsia subgroups may provide guidance for empirical therapy. Nevertheless, even analysis of individual symptoms does not provide a sufficient diagnostic yield to differentiate functional from organic dyspepsia and appropriate investigations are needed in patients with poor response to short‐term therapy or frequent relapses.