Gastric electrical stimulation in gastroparesis: where do we stand?

Gastroparesis is a chronic disabling condition of impaired gastric motility that results in decreased quality of life. Currently available medical therapy consists of prokinetic and/or antiemetic therapy, dietary modifications, and nutritional supplementation. For patients with medication-resistant gastroparesis a non-pharmacological therapy, gastric electric stimulation, has evolved over the last decade. Based on the frequency of the electrical stimulus, gastric electric stimulation can be classified into low- and high-frequency gastric electric stimulation. The first method aims to normalize gastric dysrhythmia and entrain gastric slow waves and accelerates gastric emptying, whereas high-frequency gastric electric stimulation is unable to restore normal gastric emptying, but nevertheless stunningly reduces symptoms, such as nausea and vomiting, re-establishes quality of life, nutritional state in all patients, and metabolic control in patients with diabetic gastroparesis. Gastric electric stimulation presents a new possibility in the treatment of gastroparesis.     

Treatment of gastroparesis with electrical stimulation

Electrically stimulating the stomach to treat gastroparesis has been proposed by investigators for decades. With the development of techniques of implantable pacing devices and electrodes and promising preliminary results in chronic pacing studies, gastric electrical stimulation (GES) has received increasing attention recently among researchers and clinicians. A number of studies have been performed to investigate the effects of GES on gastric motility, gastric emptying, and gastrointestinal symptoms in both dogs and humans. Based on the frequency of the electrical stimulus used for chronic treatment of gastroparesis, gastric electrical stimulation can be classified into low-frequency stimulation (LFS) and high-frequency stimulation (HFS). Although some of the results are still controversial, the majority of these studies seem to indicate that LFS is able to normalize gastric dysrhythmias and entrain gastric slow waves and accelerate gastric emptying. On the other hand, HFS has no effect on gastric emptying but is able to significantly reduce symptoms of nausea and vomiting in gastroparetic patients. GES has provided an exciting new advance in the treatment of gastroparesis and management of upper gastrointestinal symptoms. This paper will review the available studies of GES in the treatment of gastroparesis and current status of this field.     

Effects of epalrestat,an aldose reductase inhibitor,on diabetic neuropathy and gastroparesis

OBJECTIVE: Diabetic patients with severe autonomic nervous disorder show delayed gastric emptying accompanied by diabetic gastroparesis, which decreases the electric activity of the stomach associated with gastric motility. It is reported that epalrestat, an aldose reductase inhibitor, is useful for treating diabetic neuropathy. Therefore, we evaluated whether this drug improves the decreased gastric motility in diabetic patients. METHODS: The present study evaluated the electrogastrograms (EGG) and autonomic nervous activity in 15 healthy volunteers (N group), and in 15 diabetic patients before and after the administration of epalrestat (DM group). Autonomic nervous activity was evaluated by spectral analysis of heart rate variability. The EGGs were recorded before and after oral administration of epalrestat (3 months or more) in the DM group. RESULTS: The dominant frequency of EGG was 3 cycles/min (cpm) in the N group. However, these 3 cpm waves disappeared with bradygastria, and postprandial increases in the peak powers of EGG were not observed in the DM group. Both the amplitude of 3 cpm waves and the postprandial peak powers were significantly increased after the administration of epalrestat. The parameters of autonomic nervous activities (LF power, HF power, and the LF/HF ratio) were significantly lower in the DM group before the administration of epalrestat than in the N group. However, these parameters were improved after the administration of epalrestat. CONCLUSION: Since gastroparesis is a form of diabetic dysautonomia, complication by gastroparesis may influence blood sugar control and the absorbance of oral antidiabetics. Epalrestat significantly increased the amplitude of 3 cpm waves on EGG and improved the spectral analytical parameters of heart rate variability. These findings suggest that epalrestat is useful for the treatment of diabetic gastroparesis.     

Gastric myoelectrical activity in patients with gastric outlet obstruction and idiopathic gastroparesis

Objective: The cause of gastroparesis may be uncertain in some patients. Mechanical obstruction of the stomach or duodenum should be excluded in patients with idiopathic gastroparesis. The objective of this study was to compare gastric myoelectrical activity in patients with idiopathic gastroparesis with that of patients with gastroparesis due to mechanical obstruction of the stomach or duodenum.
Methods: Electrogastrography techniques were used to record gastric myoelectrical activity in 20 patients with idiopathic gastroparesis and in nine patients with gastroparesis secondary to gastric outlet obstruction. Four of these nine patients initially were thought to have idiopathic gastroparesis. Electrogastrograms (EGGs) were recorded from 29 healthy subjects who served as controls. EGGs were recorded for 20–30 min 2 h after a standard 200-Kcal meal and were analyzed visually and by computer.
Results: Patients with gastroparesis due to outlet obstruction had high-amplitude and excessively regular 3–cycles-per-minute (cpm) EGG patterns, whereas patients with idiopathic gastroparesis had primarily 1- to 2-cpm patterns and little 3-cpm EGG activity. The percentage of total EGG power in the 3-cpm range was approximately 50% in patients with gastric outlet obstruction compared with 20% in patients with idiopathic gastroparesis (   p < 0.001  ). The percentage of EGG power in the normal 3-cpm range was greater in the obstructed patients (50%) than in the healthy controls (35%;   p < 0.052  ).
Conclusions: Gastric myoelectrical patterns recorded in the EGG distinguish mechanical and idiopathic causes of gastroparesis and may be useful in evaluating patients with nausea, vomiting, and gastroparesis of unknown cause.     

Gastric electrical stimulation for gastroparesis: a goal greatly pursued, but not yet attained

The lack of an effective medical treatment for gastroparesis has pushed the research of new techniques of gastric electrical stimulation (GES) for nearly half a century of experimentation with a large variety of electrical stimuli delivered to the gastric wall of animals and patients with gastroparesis. Three principal methods are currently available: gastric low-frequency/high-energy GES with long pulse stimulation, high-frequency/low-energy GES with short pulse stimulation and neural sequential GES. The f...     

Gastric Electrical Stimulation With Parameters for Gastroparesis Enhances Gastric Accommodation and Alleviates Distention-Induced Symptoms in Dogs

Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) improves symptoms in patients with gastroparesis. We sought to determine if stimulation at fundus with parameters used for gastroparesis could affect gastric accommodation and distention-induced symptoms in dogs. Nine dogs were implanted with a gastric cannula at the anterior stomach and 1 pair of stimulation electrodes in the fundus. Assessment of gastric accommodation and a series of gastric distention were performed using a barostat. Stimulation parameters were of short pulse trains of 14 Hz, 5 mA, 0.3 ms, and 0.1 s on, 5 s off. GES at fundus significantly decreased fasting gastric tone. Fasting gastric volume was significantly increased from 56.3+/-10.4 mL at baseline to 102.4+/-23.1 mL with stimulation (P=.011). Postprandial gastric accommodation was significantly enhanced with stimulation. The extent of accommodation increased from 249.3+/-39.9 mL in the control session to 325.8+/-25.1 mL with stimulation (P=.011). Symptom scores induced by balloon distention of the stomach were significantly lower during stimulation in comparison with those of baseline (P=.016). In conclusion, GES with parameters for gastroparesis enhances postprandial gastric accommodation and reduces visceral perception in normal dogs. This effect, if seen also in humans, may explain in part the symptomatic improvement associated with GES therapy in patients with gastroparesis.     

Antral Myoelectric Activity,Gastric Emptying,and Dyspeptic Symptoms in Diabetics

Background: Electrogastrography (EGG) enables the cutaneous measurement of gastric electric activity. An association between electric abnormalities and gastrointestinal motility disorders has been shown. The primary objective of this study was to investigate whether diabetic gastroparesis could be predicted by EGG.

Methods: EGG was performed in 18 insulin-treated type-II diabetics (9 female, 9 male; median age, 64 years; range, 45-76 years) with chronic dyspepsia. After an overnight fast, during 1 h in the fasting and 1 h in the fed state after ingestion of a liquid-solid test meal (370 kcal; liquid phase labeled with 0.5 mCi ^99mTc-colloid) antral electric activity was captured by one pair of electrodes sonographically placed on the skin overlying the gastric antrum. Several EGG variables including dominant frequency (DF), percentages of DF in the normal range (24 cycles per minute (cpm)), bradygastria (<2cpm), and tachygastria (4-10 cpm), dominant frequency instability coefficient (DFIC), and postprandial to preprandial power ratio (PR) were calculated by fast Fourier transform. The data were correlated to results obtained in 20 age- and gender-matched healthy subjects (10 female, 10 male; median age, 68 years; range, 53-90 years). In addition, the data were compared with the percentages of retention of the radionuclide in the stomach at 60 min, and lag times measured by simultaneous scintigraphy.

Results: The EGG values obtained in diabetics did not differ significantly from those in healthy subjects and did not correlate with radioscintigraphy (p > 0.05). Moreover, the EGG values in diabetics with delayed gastric emptying (about 40%) did not differ from data in diabetics without gastroparesis. Furthermore, whereas dyspepsia correlated significantly with radioscintigraphy, no correlation with EGG could be found.

Conclusions: Electrogastrography seems to be unsuitable for assessment of motility disorders in type4 diabetics.     

Gastric electrical stimulation for the treatment of diabetic gastroparesis

Diabetic gastroparesis is a component of autonomic neuropathy, and is the most common manifestation of gastrointestinal neuropathy. Diabetes is responsible for about one quarter of gastroparesis. The upper gastrointestinal symptoms are often non-specific and dominated by nausea, vomiting, early satiety, fullness, bloating. We also have to look for diabetic gastroparesis in case of metabolic instability, such as postprandial hypoglycaemia. The pathophysiology of diabetic gastroparesis is complex, partly due to a vagus nerve damage, but also to changes in secretion of hormones such as motilin and ghrelin. A decrease in the stem cell factor (SCF), growth factor for cells of Cajal (gastric pacemaker), was found in subjects with diabetic gastroparesis. These abnormalities lead to an excessive relaxation in the corpus, a hypomotility of antrum, a desynchronization antrum-duodenum-pylorus, and finally an abnormal duodenal motility. The treatment of diabetic gastroparesis is based on diabetes control, and split meals by reducing the fiber content and fat from the diet. The antiemetic and prokinetic agents should be tested primarily in people with nausea and vomiting. Finally, after failure of conventional measures, the use of gastric neuromodulation is an effective alternative, with well-defined indications. Introduced in the 1970s, this technology works by applying electrical stimulation continues at the gastric antrum, particularly in patients whose gastric symptoms are refractory to other therapies. Its efficacy has been recently reported in different causes of gastroparesis, especially in diabetes. Gastric emptying based on gastric scintigraphy, gastrointestinal symptoms, biological markers of glycaemic control and quality of life are partly improved, but not normalized. Finally, a heavy nutritional care is sometimes necessary in the most severe forms. The enteral route should be preferred (nasojejunal and jejunostomy if possible efficiency). However, in case of failure especially in patients with small bowel neuropathy, the long-term parenteral nutrition is sometimes required.     

Gastric Electrical Stimulation Does Not Significantly Affect Canine Gastric Acid Secretion and 24-Hour Gastric pH

Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) was shown to improve symptoms in patients with gastroparesis. However, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. This study assessed the influence of various patterns of GES on fasting and postprandial gastric acid secretion and 24-hr gastric pH. Eight healthy dogs were studied and we found that in the fasting state, low-frequency, long-pulse (6/12-cpm, 375-msec, 4-mA) GES at the proximal stomach significantly inhibited the secretion of gastric juice (P < 0.05). No such effect was observed during GES (6/12 cpm) at the distal stomach. In the postprandial period, low-frequency, long-pulse GES at both proximal and distal sites and at both frequencies did not significantly affect gastric acid secretion. High-frequency, short-pulse GES, investigated for obesity (21 Hz, 8 mA, and 250 microsec, with 2 secs on, 3 sec off), at the proximal and distal stomach did not significantly affect the 24-hr gastric pH profile. In conclusion, GES with various stimulation parameters, and at various sites, has little effect on gastric acid secretion. The clinical effects induced by GES at these parameters may not be related to their effect on gastric acid homeostasis.     

The "electrical way" to cure gastroparesis

The treatment of gastroparesis recently received a heavy blow from the restrictions on the use of the prokinetic drug cisapride, but, fortunately, at the same time, a nonpharmacological approach, such as gastric electrical stimulation, came up again with new techniques. After an ultra-decennial experimentation with a large variety of electrical stimuli delivered to the gastric wall of animals and patients with gastroparesis, three principal methods are available at the moment: gastric electrical pacing, high-frequency gastric electrical stimulation, and sequential neural electrical stimulation. The first method aims to reset a regular slow-wave rhythm, but is unable to re-establish efficient contractions and a normal gastric emptying. High-frequency gastric electrical stimulation, although inadequate to restore a normal gastric emptying, nevertheless strikingly improves the dyspeptic symptoms, such as nausea and vomiting, giving the patients a better quality of life and a more satisfactory nutritional status. The last method, neural electrical gastric stimulation, consists of a microprocessor-controlled sequential activation of a series of annular electrodes which encircle the distal two thirds of the stomach and induce propagated contractions causing a forceful emptying of the gastric content. The latter method is the most promising, but it has so far only been tested in animals and would need to be tested in patients with gastroparesis before it can be used as a solution for this disease. All the aforementioned clinical studies, however, are not controlled and nearly all were published in abstract form. Therefore, further controlled trials are needed to establish which of these techniques is more useful for the treatment of gastroparesis.     

Gastric electrical stimulation in patients with gastroparesis

Abstract As in the heart, there is a pacemaker in the human stomach and it generates myoelectrical activity with a frequency of approximately three cycles per minute. Abnormalities in gastric myoelectrical activity may result in gastric motility disorders, such as gastroparesis. Electrical stimulation of the stomach is achieved by delivering electrical currents via electrodes attached to the smooth muscle of the stomach. Recently, a number of studies on electrical stimulation of the stomach in both humans and dogs have indicated that gastric electrical stimulation with appropriate parameters is able to entrain gastric slow waves and normalize gastric dysrhythmias. This has led some investigators to use gastric electrical stimulation to treat patients with gastroparesis. Previous studies and the current state of the field in gastric electrical stimulation in treatment of gastroparesis will be discussed and summarized.     

Gastric electrical stimulation: An emerging therapy for children with intractable gastroparesis

Management of gastroparesis remains challenging, particularly in pediatric patients. Supportive care and pharmacological therapies for symptoms remain the mainstay treatment. Although they are effective for mild and some moderately severe cases, often time they do not work for severe gastroparesis. There are a few prokinetics available, yet the use of these drugs is limited by a lack of persistent efficacy and/or safety concerns. Currently, the only modality for adult patients with severe intractable gastroparesis is surgery, e.g., pyloroplasty and partial gastrectomy, however, this option is generally considered too radical for a growing child. Novel therapeutic approaches, particularly those which are less invasive, are needed. This article explores gastric electrical stimulation (GES), a new therapy for gastroparesis. Unlike others, it neither needs medications nor gastrectomy; rather, it treats through the use of microelectrodes to deliver high-frequency low energy electric stimulation to the pacemaker area of the stomach. Thus, it is tolerated and safe in children. Like in adult patients, GES appears to work in releasing symptoms, improving nutrition, and enhancing the quality of life; it also helps wean off medications and eliminate many needs for hospitalization. Considering the transient nature of gastroparesis in children in many occasions, GES is considered a “bridging” therapy after failed medical interventions and before surgery.     

Treatment of high-frequency gastric electrical stimulation for gastroparesis

Background and Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of gastric electrical stimulation (GES) on symptoms and gastric emptying in patients with gastroparesis, and the effects of GES on the three subgroups of gastroparesis. Methods: A literature search of clinical trials using high‐frequency GES to treat patients with gastroparesis from January 1995 to January 2011 was performed. Data on the total symptom severity score (TSS), nausea severity score, vomiting severity score, and gastric emptying were extracted and analyzed. The statistic effect index was weighted mean differences. Results: Ten studies (n = 601) were included in this study. In the comparison to baseline, there was significant improvement of symptoms and gastric emptying (P < 0.00001). It was noted that GES significantly improved both TSS (P < 0.00001) and gastric retention at 2 h (P = 0.003) and 4 h (P < 0.0001) in patients with diabetic gastroparesis (DG), while gastric retention at 2 h (P = 0.18) in idiopathic gastroparesis (IG) patients, and gastric retention at 4 h (P = 0.23) in postsurgical gastroparesis (PSG) patients, did not reach significance. Conclusions: Based on this meta‐analysis, the substantial and significant improvement of symptoms and gastric emptying, and the good safety we observed, indicate that high‐frequency GES is an effective and safe method for treating refractory gastroparesis. DG patients seem the most responsive to GES, both subjectively and objectively, while the IG and PSG subgroups are less responsive and need further research.     

Gastric electrical stimulation for medically refractory gastroparesis

Background & aims:

This study investigated the efficacy of gastric electrical stimulation for the treatment of symptomatic gastroparesis unresponsive to standard medical therapy.

Methods:

Thirty-three patients with chronic gastroparesis (17 diabetic and 16 idiopathic) received continuous high-frequency/low-energy gastric electrical stimulation via electrodes in the muscle wall of the antrum connected to a neurostimulator in an abdominal wall pocket. After implantation, patients were randomized in a double-blind crossover design to stimulation ON or OFF for 1-month periods. The blind was then broken, and all patients were programmed to stimulation ON and evaluated at 6 and 12 months. Outcome measures were vomiting frequency, preference for ON or OFF, upper gastrointestinal tract symptoms, quality of life, gastric emptying, and adverse events.

Results:

In the double-blind portion of the study, self-reported vomiting frequency was significantly reduced in the ON vs. OFF period (P < 0.05) and this symptomatic improvement was consistent with the significant patient preference (P < 0.05) for the ON vs. OFF period determined before breaking the blind. In the unblinded portion of the study, vomiting frequency decreased significantly (P < 0.05) at 6 and 12 months. Scores for symptom severity and quality of life significantly improved (P < 0.05) at 6 and 12 months, whereas gastric emptying was only modestly accelerated. Five patients had their gastric electrical stimulation system explanted or revised because of infection or other complications.

Conclusions:

High-frequency/low-energy gastric electrical stimulation significantly decreased vomiting frequency and gastrointestinal symptoms and improved quality of life in patients with severe gastroparesis.     

Gastric electrical stimulation results in improved metabolic control in diabetic patients suffering from gastroparesis.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Symptoms of gastroparesis possess a heavy impact on the quality of life; delayed gastric emptying may result in poor metabolic control in diabetics. Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) has recently been introduced as a treatment option in patients with drug refractory gastroparesis to increase the quality of life by alleviating nausea and vomiting frequencies. However, the effect of GES on metabolic control has not been assessed yet. METHODS: We performed a prospective single center study on the long-term effect (12 months) of continuous high-frequency/low-energy GES on symptoms, gastric emptying (measured scintigraphically), and metabolic control (HbA1c) in insulin-dependent diabetic subjects suffering from drug-refractory gastroparesis for more than one year. RESULTS: Seventeen (12 female, 5 male) patients entered the study; all were available for analysis at all time points. No therapy-associated adverse events occurred. Weekly vomiting and nausea frequencies decreased significantly at 6 and 12 months. Gastric retention rates improved significantly from 83 % (2 h) and 38 % (4 h) to 35 % (2 h)/14 % (4 h) and 25 % (2 h)/17 % (4 h) at 6 and 12 months, respectively. HbA1c values were lowered in all 17 subjects; initially, all HbA1c values were above 7.5 %; at 6 and 12 months, mean values had significantly decreased from 8.6 % to 6.2 % and 6.5 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Gastric electrical stimulation offers symptom control in diabetics with drug-refractory gastroparesis and decreases gastric retention. This study, for the first time, documents a positive effect of this therapy on metabolic control as indicated by HbA1c, a surrogate marker of the risk of diabetic complications.     

Gastric electrical stimulation in intractable symptomatic gastroparesis

BACKGROUND: The treatment of gastroparesis remains unsatisfactory despite prokinetic and anti-emetic drugs. Gastric electrical stimulation has been proposed as a therapeutic option. We have assessed the effect of gastric electrical stimulation on symptoms, medical treatment, body weight and gastric emptying in patients with intractable symptomatic gastroparesis in a non-placebo-controlled study. METHODS: In this multicenter study, 38 highly symptomatic patients with drug-refractory gastroparesis were enrolled. Patients first received temporary electrical stimulation using percutaneous electrodes. The 33 responders to temporary stimulation then underwent surgical implantation of a permanent stimulator. Severity of vomiting and nausea was assessed before and after stimulation. Patients were reassessed 3, 6, and 12 months after permanent implantation. RESULTS: With stimulation, 35/38 patients (97%) experienced >80% reduction in vomiting and nausea. This effect persisted throughout the observation period (2.9-15.6 months, 341 patient-months). Gastric emptying did not initially change, but improved in most patients at 12 months. At 1 year, the average weight gain was 5.5% and 9/14 patients initially receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition were able to discontinue it. CONCLUSION: Electrical stimulation of the stomach has an immediate and potent anti-emetic effect. It offers a safe and effective alternative for patients with intractable symptomatic gastroparesis.     

The Effect on Gastric Tone of Gastric Electrical Stimulation with Trains of Short Pulses Varies with Sites and Stimulation Conditions

BACKGROUND: Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) can improve symptoms in patients with gastroparesis and induce weight loss in obese subjects. AIMS: To evaluate the effect on gastric tone of GES under different conditions at different sites of the stomach. METHODS: Eleven dogs were implanted with a gastric cannula and two pairs of stimulation electrodes (in the middle of the lesser curvature and of the greater curvature, 10 cm from the pylorus). Gastric tone was assessed with a barostat. GES was applied using: (1) Enterra conditions (14 Hz, 5 mA, 0.3 ms, 0.1 s on, 5 s off); (2) modified Enterra conditions (40 Hz, 5 mA, 0.3 ms, 0.1 s on, 5 s off); and (3) implantable gastric stimulation (IGS) conditions (40 Hz, 5 mA, 0.3 ms, 2 s on, 3 s off). Six sessions were performed randomly with each animal on six separate days. RESULTS: (1) At the lesser curvature, GES with modified Enterra conditions significantly elevated gastric volume from 96.9 +/- 8.3 ml at baseline to 133.9 +/- 11.7 ml (P = 0.015) and a similar effect was observed with IGS (91.3 +/- 7.1 ml vs. 186.3 +/- 27.1 ml, P = 0.013). GES with Enterra conditions had no such an effect. (2) At the greater curvature, GES with Enterra conditions significantly increased gastric volume from basal 94.1 +/- 4.4 ml to 122.1 +/- 11.3 ml (P = 0.032); modified Enterra conditions had the opposite effect (96.5 +/- 9.0 ml vs. 77.4 +/- 11.7 ml, P = 0.025) and no significant effect was observed with IGS conditions. CONCLUSION: The effects of GES on gastric tone vary with the conditions and sites of stimulation. These findings may help to explain the distinct effects of GES therapy in patients with gastroparesis and obesity.     

原发性病理性十二指肠胃反流患者的胃电活动和胃排空研究

目的 通过分析原发性病理性十二指肠胃反流(DGR)患者胆汁反流程度与体表胃电节律变化以及胃排空运动之间的关系,探讨原发性病理性DGR致病因素.方法 收集2007年1月至2008年4月青岛市立医院门诊诊断为原发性病理性DGR患者58例(DGR组)和健康者21例(对照组)进行24 h胃内胆红素监测、胃镜、胃电图和胃排空检测,分析胃电参数及其与胃排空、胆汁反流和Hp之间的关系.结果 ①原发性病理性DGR患者的餐前及餐后胃电慢波主频率[(1.94±0.04) cpm比(2.93±0.07) cpm;(2.12±0.03) cpm比(3.35±0.05) cpm]、餐前及餐后正常胃电慢波百分比(74.46％±0.56％比85.55％±1.06％;63.97％±0.64％比86.13％±1.49％)、餐前/餐后功率比(PR)(1.68±0.02比2.75±0.09)均低于对照组(P＜0.05).原发性病理性DGR患者的餐前及餐后胃动过缓百分比(18.04％±0.36％比7.76％±0.78％;23.73％±0.91％比8.47％±0.55％)、餐前及餐后胃动过速百分比(8.93％±0.26％比5.75％±0.66％;13.02％±0.40％比7.66％±0.27％)均高于对照组(P＜0.05).②高反流组患者的餐前及餐后胃电慢波主频率[(1.68±0.07) cpm比(2.13±0.07) cpm;(2.18±0.09)cpm比(2.76±0.06)]、餐前及餐后正常胃电慢波百分比(69.71％±0.43％比80.35％±0.68％;56.36％±0.85％比72.34％±0.80％)、餐前/餐后功率比(PR)(1.47±0.04比2.02±0.04)均低于低反流组(P＜0.05).高反流组患者的餐前及餐后胃动过缓百分比(22.94％±0.68％比13.47％±0.61％;29.61％±1.14％比17.55％±0.51％)、餐前及餐后胃动过速百分比(9.94％±0.54％比7.02％±0.42％;17.04％±0.70％比10.71％±0.20％)均高于低反流组(P＜0.05);③Hp阳性组和Hp阴性组餐前、餐后各胃电参数差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05);④DGR患者胃钡条排空者明显低于对照组(37.9％比90.5％,P＜0.05).DGR组胃排空延迟较对照组明显增多,两者比较差异,(60.3％比9.5％,P＜0.05).高反流组与低反流组比较胃排空延迟率差异无统计学意义(69.0％比51.7％,P＞0.05).结论 原发性病理性DGR患者存在胃电节律紊乱和胃运动功能障碍,这可能是病理性DGR的一个重要原因.     

Management of Diabetic Gastroparesis

Symptoms suggestive of gastroparesis occur in 5% to 12% of patients with diabetes. Such a complication can affect both prognosis and management of the diabetes; therefore, practicing clinicians are challenged by the complex management of such cases. Gastroparesis is a disorder characterized by a delay in gastric emptying after a meal in the absence of a mechanical gastric outlet obstruction. This article is an evidence-based overview of current management strategies for diabetic gastroparesis. The cardinal symptoms of diabetic gastroparesis are nausea and vomiting. Gastroesophageal scintiscanning at 15-minute intervals for 4 hours after food intake is considered the gold standard for measuring gastric emptying. Retention of more than 10% of the meal after 4 hours is considered an abnormal result, for which a multidisciplinary management approach is required. Treatment should be tailored according to the severity of gastroparesis, and 25% to 68% of symptoms are controlled by prokinetic agents. Commonly prescribed prokinetics include metoclopramide, domperidone, and erythromycin. In addition, gastric electrical stimulation has been shown to improve symptoms, reduce hospitalizations, reduce the need for nutritional support, and improve quality of life in several open-label studies.     

Sham feeding

The effects of sham feeding on gastric motility of human subjects have not previously been studied. The amplitude of 3-cpm electrogastrogram (EGG) waves increases after the ingestion of food. We hypothesized that sham feeding would stimulate a similar, but briefer gastric myoelectric response. Healthy human subjects chewed and expectorated a hot dog on a roll and later ate a second hot dog. EGGs were continuously recorded before, during, and after sham feeding and eating. The results of experiment I (N=27) showed that the hand-scored amplitude of the 3-cpm waves increased significantly (P<0.01) during sham feeding. Two minutes after sham feeding, the mean amplitude of 3-cpm EGG waves returned to baseline level. The increase in EGG amplitude during eating was also significant (P<0.01), and remained increased for approximately 30 min after ingestion. The procedure used in experiment II (N=20) was similar to experiment I, but EGGs were computer analyzed and power, ie, spectral intensities, at 3 cpm were obtained. The increase in power at 3 cpm during sham feeding and during eating was significant (P< 0.05 and P<0.02, respectively). Similar to experiment I, the duration of increase in power at 3 cpm was brief during sham feeding compared to the postprandial increase. Four vagotimized subjects failed to show an increase in power at 3 cpm in response to sham feeding. We conclude: (1) The cephalic—vagal stimulation of sham feeding increases briefly the amplitude and power of 3-cpm gastric myoelectric activity in healthy subjects but not vagotomized patients. (2) The increase in postprandial 3-cpm amplitude is prolonged, reflecting initial cephalic-vagal activity and subsequent gastric stimulation by luminal contents.