Search

Introduction: Patients with gastroparesis (Gp) have symptoms with or without a cyclic pattern. This retrospective study evaluates differences in cyclic vs. non-cyclic symptoms of Gp by analyzing mucosal electrogastrogram (mEG), familial dysautonomias, and response to gastric stimulation., Methods: 37 patients with drug refractory Gp, 7 male and 30 female, with a mean age of 41.4 years, were studied. 18 had diabetes mellitus, 25 had cyclic (Cyc), and 12 had a non-cyclic (NoCyc) pattern of symptoms. Patients underwent temporary mucosal gastric stimulator (tGES) placement, which was done as a trial before permanent stimulator (GES) placement. Electrogastrogram (EGG) by mucosal (mEG) measures, including frequency, amplitude, and frequency-amplitude ratio (FAR), were pre- and post-tGES. Patients' history of personal and familial dysautonomias, quality of life, and symptom scores were recorded. Baseline vs. follow-ups were compared by paired t tests and McNemar's tests. T tests contrasted symptom scores, gastric emptying tests (GET), and mEG measures, while chi-squared tests deciphered comorbidity differences between two groups and univariate and multivariate analyses., Results: There were significantly more patients with diabetes in the Cyc group vs. the NoCyc group. Using a 1 point in symptom outcome, 18 patients did not improve and 19 did improve with tGES. Using univariable analysis, with the cyclic pattern as a predictor, patients exhibiting a cyclic pattern had an odds ratio of 0.22 (95% CI 0.05-0.81, p = 0.054) for achieving an improvement of at least one unit in vomiting at follow-up from baseline. The mucosal electrogastrogram frequency to amplitude ratio (FAR) for the "not Improved" group was 19.6 [3.5, 33.6], whereas, for the "Improved" group, it was 54.3 [25.6, 72.5] with a p-value of 0.049. For multivariate logistic regression, accounting for sex and age squared, patients exhibiting a cyclic pattern had an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.16 (95% CI 0.03-0.81, p = 0.027) for achieving an improvement of at least one unit in vomiting at follow-up from baseline. The two groups had no significant differences in the personal or inherited history of investigated familial patterns., Conclusion: This study shows differences in Gp patients with Cyc vs. NoCyc symptoms in several areas. Larger studies are needed to elicit further differences between the two groups about cycles of symptoms, EGG, findings, familial patterns, and response to mucosal GES., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Factors underlying gastroparesis are not well defined., Aims: We hypothesized that multiple systems may be involved in patients with gastroparesis symptoms and performed a comparative physiologic study., Methods: We studied 43 consecutive eligible patients with gastroparetic symptoms categorized by GI symptoms, metabolic status, illness quantification, and gastric physiology. Patients were evaluated by two methods in each of five core areas: inflammatory, autonomic, enteric, electrophysiologic, and hormonal with abnormalities examined by correlations., Results: Patients had similar GI symptoms regardless of baseline gastric emptying or diabetic/idiopathic status, and all patients demonstrated abnormalities in each of the 5 areas studied. Nearly all patients presented with elevated markers of serum TNFα (88%) and serum IL-6 (91%); elevated cutaneous electrogastrogram frequency (95%); and interstitial cells of Cajal count abnormalities (inner: 97%, outer: 100%). Measures of inflammation correlated with a number of autonomic, enteric anatomy, electrophysiologic and hormonal abnormalities., Conclusions: We conclude that patients with the symptoms of gastroparesis have multiple abnormalities, when studied by traditional, as well as newer, diagnostic assessments. Inflammation appears to be a fundamental abnormality that affects other organ systems in symptomatic patients. Future work on gastroparetic syndromes and their treatment may benefit from a focus on the diffuse nature of their illness, diverse pathophysiologic mechanisms involved, especially the possible causes of underlying inflammation and disordered hormonal status., Trail Registry: This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov under study # NCT03178370 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03178370 .

Background/Aims Gastroparesis-like syndrome (GLS) is defined as gastroparesis-like symptoms with normal gastric scintigraphy. While the efficacy of gastric electrical stimulation (GES) in gastroparesis is well known, the utility of GES in GLS is largely unknown. Our aim was to clarify the role of GES in GLS. We implanted consecutive patients with symptoms of gastroparesis with temporary gastric electrical stimulation and observed changes in gastric scintigraphy and total symptom score. Methods Five hundred and fifty-one patients suffering from symptoms of gastroparesis (nausea, vomiting, bloating/distension, anorexia/ early satiety, and abdominal pain) with negative endoscopy underwent gastric scintigraphy with analysis of 1) solid radionuclide gastric emptying at 1, 2, and 4 hours (% remaining); 2) area under the gastric emptying curve (AUC) at 1, 2, and 4 hours; and 3) total gastric emptying test (GET) (the sum of 1, 2, and 4 hour values). Patients were stratified into: delayed gastric emptying, normal gastric emptying, and rapid gastric emptying (Appendix). Of the 551 patients in the larger cohort, 379 had implantation of temporary gastric electrical stimulation (tGES). Gastrointestinal symptoms and gastric emptying were com - pared pre and post tGES implantation. Results After tGES, 2 hour gastric retention decreased (P < 0.01) for the delayed patients, and increased (P< 0.001) for normal and rapid patients. These changes were accompanied by improvements (P< 0.001) in vomiting, nausea, and total symptom scores in all 3 subgroups. Conclusions Gastric electrical stimulation may be an effective therapy for treating the symptoms of gastroparesis with normal gastric emptying. Further exploration of endoscopic electrical stimulation as a treatment for gastroparesis-like symptoms with non-delayed gastric emptying is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Factors underlying gastroparesis are not well defined, nor is the mechanism of action of gastric electrical stimulation (GES). We hypothesized that GES acts via several mechanisms related to underlying disordered pathophysiology. Methods: We studied 43 consecutive eligible patients with gastroparetic symptoms, previously evaluated by two methods in each of five core areas: inflammatory, autonomic, enteric, electrophysiologic, and hormonal; and also categorized by GI symptoms, metabolic status, illness quantification, and gastric physiology. We then studied 41 patients who underwent temporary GES for 5‐7 days. Thirty‐six of those patients were implanted and 30 were followed up at 6 months after permanent GES. Results: In previous but separately reported work, patients had similar GI symptoms regardless of baseline gastric emptying or diabetic/idiopathic status and all patients demonstrated abnormalities in each of the five areas studied. After GES, patients showed early and late effects of electrical stimulation with changes noted in multiple areas, categorized by improvement status. Conclusion: Patients with symptoms of gastroparesis have multiple abnormalities, including systemic inflammation and disordered hormonal status. GES affects many of these abnormalities. We conclude electrical stimulation improves symptoms and physiology with (a) an early and sustained anti‐emetic effect; (b) an early and durable gastric prokinetic effect in delayed emptying patients; (c) an early anti‐arrhythmic effect that continues over time; (d) a late autonomic effect; (e) a late hormonal effect; (f) an early anti‐inflammatory effect that persists; and (g) an early and sustained improvement in health‐related quality of life. This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov under study # NCT03178370 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03178370). A consensus does not exist on the pathophysiologic factors underlying gastroparetic symptoms. Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) has early and late effects on disordered physiology in gastroparetic symptom patients. Gastric electrical stimulation might better be classified as neuromodulation due to its several possible mechanisms of action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]