Search

Background Bisacodyl is a member of the diphenylmethane family and is considered to be a stimulant laxative. It has a dual prokinetic and secretory action and needs to be converted into the active metabolite bis‐(p‐hydroxyphenyl)‐pyridyl‐2‐methane (BHPM) in the gut to achieve the desired laxative effect. Bisacodyl acts locally in the large bowel by directly enhancing the motility, reducing transit time, and increasing the water content of the stool. A recent network meta‐analysis concluded that bisacodyl showed similar efficacy to prucalopride, lubiprostone, linaclotide, tegaserod, velusetrag, elobixibat, and sodium picosulfate for the primary endpoint of ≥3 complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBM)/week and an increase of ≥1 CSBM/week over baseline. The meta‐analysis also found that bisacodyl may be superior to the other laxatives for the secondary endpoint of change from baseline in the number of spontaneous bowel movements per week in patients with chronic constipation. This observation stimulated the authors to review the available literature on bisacodyl, which has been available on the market since the 1950 s. Purpose The aim of the current review was to provide an overview of the historic background, structure, function, and mechanism of action of bisacodyl. Additionally, we discuss the important features and studies for bisacodyl to understand its peculiar characteristics and guide its use in clinical practice, but also stimulate research on open questions.

Patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) report an increased frequency of sensations during rectal distension in comparison with healthy subjects. This alteration might be due to a psychological response bias leading patients to over report their sensations. The aim of this study was to measure perceptual sensitivity and response bias during rectal distension in healthy subjects and IBS patients using the sensory decision theory (SDT). Thirteen healthy subjects and 22 IBS patients underwent five rectal distensions up to 100 mL, five up to 200 mL and five sham distensions. They were asked to identify the distension by means of an electronic marker. Perceptual sensitivity and response bias were calculated according to the SDT. The patients identified a more 100 mL distensions than the healthy subjects (P = 0.02), whereas there was no difference in the number of identified 200 mL and sham distensions between the two groups. The perceptual sensitivity of IBS patients was significantly greater during 100 mL (P = 0.01), but not during 200 mL distensions. The response bias was not significantly different between the two groups. These data suggest that the increased frequency of sensations reported by IBS patients is not due to a psychological response bias.