Talk:Mebeverine

Note

Having tried every imaginable drug/supplement for IBS, largely in vain, I have found mebeverine (a.k.a. Colofac IBS, available only online from the UK) to be a godsend, taken as 1 tablet 20 minutes before each meal. It is also crucial to google the IBS diet and try to identify one's personal trigger foods. Finally, soluble fiber in the form of FOODS, not fiber supplements, is at least as important as the drug. Meditrix (talk) 22:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Abbott Laboratories

Please accept the edits to this page (February 14, 2013). My name is Scott Stoffel, and I work at Abbott Laboratories in Corporate Public Affairs, and the edits I am providing are all factual, based upon review of the page with Abbott Laboratories scientists who have expertise in this area. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to access my contact information, found here: http://abbott.com/news-media/contacts.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottStoffelAbbott (talk • contribs) 18:36, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Anticholinergic side-effects

If it is antimuscarinic, can we say it is 'without anticholinergic side-effects' as it stands in the article? 77.93.29.14 (talk) 17:20, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Condensing

User:Karol Langner about this. I agree that this article probably doesn't need any sections at all. I feel that people generally overuse sectioning. But to the extent that we are using them, this should follow the structure described for drugs in WP:MEDMOS. I often collapse brief articles like this but people end up putting the sections back, so I generally don't fuss over it. Jytdog (talk) 15:33, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Got it, Jytdog. I don't have strong feelings about sections, but my edit improved (I believe) more than just sectioning. Karol (talk) 15:37, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

I think this article would be better with no sections. It is brief enough. I doubt this would be sustained though -- people will come back and start adding them in again. We can try it if you like but we shouldn't raise a ruckus if people restore them....Jytdog (talk) 15:41, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Like I said, I don't have strong feelings about the sections, my point was that I improved the wording (in my mind) a lot, and the text read much better after my edit. Jytdog, if you restore my version, I can shorten the intro or get rid of all sections, whichever you think makes more sense. Either way, this was just a drive-by edit, I actually got here via the 'random article' link :D Karol (talk) 11:08, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Evidence update

There has been a far newer systematic review: The Efficacy of Mebeverine in the Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome—A Systematic Review - PMC in 2022, focusing on RCTs

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8879004/

he 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. 147.161.145.115 (talk) 12:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)