Parkman, H P

ABSTRACT Background Patients with gastroparesis (Gp) can have a variety of symptoms. Apart from use of prokinetics, symptomatic therapies for the predominant symptom (PrS) are used. Aims (1) To classify Gp patients based on their PrS; (2) To determine differences in Gp symptoms, gastric emptying (GE), quality of life (QOL), treatments, and symptom improvement among Gp patients with different PrS. Methods Gp patients were enrolled in a multicenter registry and followed for 96‐weeks. Patients recorded their PrS and completed questionnaires assessing symptoms and QOL at enrollment and at follow up visits. Results Of 1013 Gp patients (361 diabetic, 607 idiopathic, 45 post‐fundoplication), the PrS were nausea (31%), vomiting (20%), abdominal pain (20%), bloating (9%), fullness (4%), GERD (4%), constipation (3%). Abdominal pain was more often a PrS in idiopathics, whereas vomiting was more often a PrS in diabetics. QOL scores were lower in the abdominal pain PrS group. PrS was associated with greater use of directed symptomatic treatment (antiemetic agents and gastric electrical stimulation for nausea and vomiting, prokinetic agents for vomiting and fullness, and constipation medications for constipation). Of 555 patients followed over 48 weeks, GCSI improved by ≥ 1 in 26% overall, more often in patients with initial PrS of nausea (32%) and bloating (35%) and less often for initial PrS of fullness (13%) or abdominal pain (15%). Conclusions In Gp patients, the most common PrS were nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. PrS is associated with QOL, treatments utilized, and patient outcomes. Thus, the PrS of a patient with Gp provides useful information about their present condition and future outcome.

ABSTRACT Background Chronic gastroduodenal symptoms arise from heterogeneous gastric motor dysfunctions. This study applied multimodal physiological testing using gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES) with intragastric meal distribution (IMD) and Gastric Alimetry body surface gastric mapping (BSGM) to define motility and symptom associations. Methods Patients with chronic gastroduodenal symptoms underwent simultaneous supine GES and BSGM with a 30 m baseline, 99mTC‐labeled egg meal, and 4 h postprandial recording. IMD (ratio of counts in the proximal half of the stomach to the total gastric counts) was calculated immediately after the meal (IMD0), with < 0.568 defining abnormal IMD. BSGM phenotyping followed a consensus approach, based on normative spectral reference intervals. Results Among 67 patients (84% female, median age 40 years, median BMI 24 kg/m 2 ), median IMD0 was 0.76 (IQR: 0.69–0.86) with 5 (7.5%) meeting abnormal IMD criteria. Delayed gastric emptying ( n = 18) was associated with higher IMD0 (median 0.9 vs. 0.7, p = 0.004). On BSGM, 15 patients had abnormal spectrograms (5 [7.5%] high frequency and 10 [14.9%] low rhythm stability and/or amplitude); and in these patients, higher IMD0 (proximal retention) strongly correlated to delayed BSGM meal responses ( R = −0.71, p = 0.003). Lower IMD, indicating antral distribution, correlated with higher gastric frequencies ( R = −0.27, p = 0.03). BSGM abnormalities paired with abnormal IMD were associated with worse dyspeptic symptoms. Conclusion Proximal retention of food as assessed by IMD correlated with delayed emptying, and in the presence of neuromuscular spectral abnormalities (abnormal frequencies or rhythms), delayed motility responses on BSGM. Patients with multiple motor abnormalities experience worse dyspeptic symptoms.

ABSTRACT Background Chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders are challenging to manage, with therapy often initiated on a trial and error basis. Prokinetics play a significant role in management, but responses are variable and have been associated with adverse events, impacting widespread use. We investigated whether body surface gastric mapping (BSGM) biomarkers (using Gastric Alimetry) could inform patient selection for prokinetic therapy. Methods Patients with chronic gastroduodenal symptoms taking oral prokinetic agents, regardless of gastric emptying status, were prospectively recruited and underwent BSGM (30 m baseline, 482 kcal standardized meal, 4 h postprandial recording) while off‐prokinetic agents. Patients were followed up with daily symptom diaries. A subset was compared to matched patients not taking prokinetic agents. Prokinetic responders were defined based on symptom improvement greater than a minimum clinically important difference methodology. Key Results Forty‐two patients (88% female; median age 36; median BMI 26) taking prokinetics were analyzed. Prokinetic prescribing, compared to matched patients, was independent of BSGM metrics ( p > 0.15). In patients on existing prokinetics (withheld for BSGM), lower amplitudes predicted reduced symptom burden, whereas low rhythm stability predicted a worse symptom burden ( p < 0.05). In prokinetic‐naive patients (i.e., started on a prokinetic during the study), a lower postprandial amplitude predicted responders (mean 37.5 ± 10.6 uV in responders [ n = 5] vs. mean 54.8 ± 6.6 uV among nonresponders [ n = 3], p = 0.047). Conclusions Gastric Alimetry biomarkers may help in the prediction of prokinetic response in patients with chronic gastroduodenal symptoms. Lower postprandial amplitudes, indicating a reduced meal response, appear to predict benefit, while impaired rhythm stability predicted poorer therapeutic response.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders are heterogeneous and thought to lie on a spectrum of disease encompassing both sensory and neuromuscular pathologies. Abnormalities of interstitial cells of Cajal (ICC), a subset of which generate pacemaker signals and subsequently motility, have been implicated in their pathophysiology. We systematically reviewed the literature to pool ICC deficits observed in chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders. METHODS: Studies quantifying gastric ICC from the corpus or antrum, in adult patients with gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia (FD), or chronic nausea and vomiting syndromes (CNVS) were analyzed (PROSPERO: CRD42024613226). MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL databases were searched systematically. Random effects meta-analyses were used to compare ICC counts by disorder group with subgroup analysis by quantification methodology. RESULTS: Overall, 2,158 studies were screened and 22 included. Comparative studies (n = 12) showed patients with chronic neurogastroduodenal disorders (n = 167 with gastroparesis, n = 19 with FD ± CNVS) had lower ICC counts than nondiabetic controls (n = 130); standardized mean difference −1.58, 95% confidence interval −2.09 to −1.07, P < 0.0001, with more severe deficits in gastroparesis compared to FD ± CNVS (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.44, P = 0.048). A spectrum of ICC deficits was evident in a subgroup of studies using gold-standard methods with c-KIT antibody and 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole-stained nuclei confirmation (7 studies, 246 patients: mean ICC counts 2.29 in gastroparesis vs 3.49 in FD ± CNVS, and 5.27 in controls; P < 0.001 all comparisons). Most studies were at high risk of bias (n = 21). DISCUSSION: Marked depletion of ICC is a consistent finding in neurogastroduodenal disorders. A spectrum of disease is revealed, with greater depletion associated with delayed emptying. Techniques for clinically defining ICC-driven gastric neuromuscular dysfunction should be prioritized.

ABSTRACTIntroductionStudies demonstrate an overlap of constipation with gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia, but the impact of treatments that target constipation on improving upper gastrointestinal (UGI) symptoms is unexplored. We quantified the effects of constipation medication therapies on UGI and constipation symptom severity in subjects presenting with symptoms of gastroparesis.MethodsFifty‐six subjects with symptoms of gastroparesis underwent concurrent wireless motility capsule and gastric emptying scintigraphy and were recommended to receive either a new medication therapy for constipation or a change in constipation therapy based on investigator interpretation of test results. Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI), upper abdominal pain, and constipation scores were compared between baseline and 6 months. Data were compared between delayed or non‐delayed gastric emptying and the presence or absence of slow colonic transit.Key ResultsSubjects with slow colonic transit had improvements in GCSI (p = 0.007) and constipation scores (p = 0.004) after treatment with a new or changed constipation medication, with the delayed emptying subgroup driving GCSI improvements (p = 0.004). Reductions in nausea/vomiting (p = 0.02) and early satiety/fullness subscores (p = 0.002) with trends to improved bloating/distention subscores (p = 0.06) were observed in this subgroup, but upper abdominal pain was unchanged. Subjects with normal colonic transit showed no improvement in GCSI scores regardless of gastric emptying status (p > 0.05).Conclusions and InferencesIdentifying and treating delayed colonic transit in gastroparetic (delayed gastric emptying) subjects improves global UGI symptoms as well as selected individual symptoms. Evaluation of whole gut motility as well as recognizing and managing extragastric delay may promote improved outcomes in these patients.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02022826

AbstractIntroductionThe American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index‐Daily Diary (ANMS GCSI‐DD) is a patient‐reported outcome (PRO) instrument for gastroparesis. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the ANMS GCSI‐DD and determined a meaningful change threshold using the data from a phase 2b trial in adults with moderate‐to‐severe idiopathic or diabetic gastroparesis (DG).MethodsThe psychometric properties of ANMS GCSI‐DD were analyzed using other clinician‐ and patient‐reported outcomes from 242 patients during the 12‐week trial. Trial exit interviews were conducted in a cohort of 32 patients to capture their perspectives on meaningful change from the trial.ResultsANMS GCSI‐DD demonstrated good performance: unidimensionality scores exhibited good fit; internal consistency reliability was >0.70; test–retest reliability was above 0.90, and convergent validity showed strong correlations (0.70–0.90) with overall severity rating and moderate correlations (0.30–0.70) with other outcomes. ANMS GCSI‐DD scores discriminated among groups with varying severity of gastroparesis symptoms in known‐groups validity (p < 0.001) and were responsive to symptom improvement. Triangulation of the quantitative anchor‐based estimates of 0.9–1.4 category points as a meaningful change in the ANMS GCSI‐DD composite score, and the qualitative exit interview findings of 0.5–1.5 as meaningful change, supports a one‐point change on a five‐point scale (0–4) as the meaningful change threshold.ConclusionThe ANMS GCSI‐DD is a reliable and valid PRO instrument to employ in clinical development for patients with moderate‐to‐severe idiopathic or DG, and a one‐point score change in the ANMS GCSI‐DD composite score is recommended as a meaningful change threshold of symptom change.

IMD0 and WLST were assessed for their clinical utility in assessing patients with symptoms of gastroparesis. Low IMD0 is associated with less gastric retention and less heartburn. Volume of water consumed during WLST, while associated with IMD0, has associations with early satiety, postprandial fullness, loss of appetite, and nausea. IMD0 and WLST appear to overlap somewhat in their assessment of gastric physiology in adults with symptoms of gastroparesis but relate to different dyspeptic symptoms.

Summary Background Patients with gastroparesis and related disorders have symptoms including early satiety, postprandial fullness and bloating. Buspirone, a 5‐HT 1 receptor agonist, may improve fundic accommodation. Aim To determine if buspirone treatment improves early satiety and postprandial fullness in patients with symptoms of gastroparesis. Methods This 4‐week multi‐centre clinical trial randomised patients with symptoms of gastroparesis and moderate‐to‐severe symptoms of fullness (Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index [GCSI] early satiety/postprandial fullness subscore [ES/PPF]) to buspirone (10 mg orally) or placebo three times per day. The primary outcome was a change in the ES/PPF from baseline to 4 weeks. The primary analysis was per protocol intention‐to‐treat ANCOVA of between‐group baseline vs. 4‐week differences (DoD) in ES/PPF adjusted for baseline ES/PPF. Results are reported using both nominal and Bonferroni (BF) p values. Results and conclusions Ninety‐six patients (47 buspirone, 49 placeboes; 92% female, 50% delayed gastric emptying, 39% diabetic) were enrolled. There was no between‐groups difference in the 4‐week ES/PPF primary outcome: −1.16 ± 1.25 (SD) on buspirone vs −1.03 ± 1.29 (SD) on placebo (mean DoD: −0.11 [95% CI: −0.68, 0.45]; p = 0.69). Buspirone performed better than placebo in patients with severe‐to‐very severe bloating at baseline compared to patients with none to moderate: (ES/PPF DoD = −0.65 vs. 1.58, p TX*GROUP = 0.003; p BF = 0.07). Among individual GCSI symptoms, only bloating appeared to improve with buspirone vs. placebo. Conclusions Patients with moderate‐to‐severe early satiety/postprandial fullness and other symptoms of gastroparesis did not benefit from buspirone treatment to improve the ES/PPF primary outcome compared with placebo. There was a suggestion of the benefit of buspirone in patients with more severe bloating. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT0358714285.

AbstractBackgroundPatients with gastroparesis (Gp) may need enteral nutrition (EN) or exclusive parenteral nutrition (PN). Among patients with Gp, we aimed to (1) identify the frequency of EN and exclusive PN use and (2) explore characteristics of patients using EN and/or exclusive PN compared with those using oral nutrition (ON), including changes over 48 weeks.MethodsPatients with Gp underwent history and physical examination, gastric emptying scintigraphy, water load satiety testing (WLST), and questionnaires assessing gastrointestinal symptoms and quality of life (QOL). Patients were observed 48 weeks.ResultsOf 971 patients with Gp (idiopathic, 579; diabetic, 336; post–Nissen fundoplication, 51), 939 (96.7%) were using ON only, 14 (1.4%) using exclusive PN, and 18 (1.9%) using EN. Compared with patients receiving ON, patients receiving exclusive PN and/or EN were younger, had lower body mass index, and had greater symptom severity. Patients receiving exclusive PN and/or EN had lower physical QOL but not mental QOL or Gp‐related QOL scores. Patients receiving exclusive PN and/or EN ingested less water during WLST but did not have worse gastric emptying. Of those who had been receiving exclusive PN and/or EN, 50% and 25%, respectively, resumed ON at 48‐week follow‐up.ConclusionsThis study describes patients with Gp requiring exclusive PN and/or EN for nutrition support, who represent a small (3.3%) but important subset of patients with Gp. Unique clinical and physiological parameters are associated with this subset and provide insight into the use of nutrition support in Gp.