Shulman, Robert

AbstractBackgroundAutoimmunity may play a role in the pathogenesis of gastroparesis in a subset of patients. Antinuclear antibody (ANA) testing is often used to screen for autoimmune disorders.Aims1) Determine prevalence of a positive ANA in patients with gastroparesis; 2) Describe characteristics of idiopathic gastroparesis patients with positive ANA.MethodsPatients were assessed with gastric emptying scintigraphy (GES), symptom assessment via Patient Assessment of Upper GI Symptoms [PAGI‐SYM], and blood tests—ANA, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C‐reactive protein (CRP).ResultsPositive ANA was seen in 148 of 893 (17%) patients with gastroparesis, being similar in idiopathic (16% of 536 patients), T1DM (16% of 162), T2DM (18% of 147), and postfundoplication (19% of 48 patients) gastroparesis. Among 536 patients with idiopathic gastroparesis, ANA titer 1:40–1:80 was seen in 33 (6%) patients, 1:160–1:320 in 36 (7%) patients, and ≥1:640 in 17 (3%) patients. Increasing ANA titer was associated with female gender (p = 0.05), Hispanic ethnicity (p = 0.02), comorbid rheumatoid arthritis (p = 0.02), systemic sclerosis (p = 0.004), and elevated ESR (p = 0.007). ANA positivity was associated with lower total GCSI (p = 0.007) and lower nausea/vomiting subscale (p = 0.0005), but not related to gastric emptying.ConclusionsThe prevalence of a positive ANA in patients with gastroparesis was high at ~17% and did not differ significantly based on etiology. In idiopathic patients, ANA positivity was associated with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, and elevated ESR. ANA‐positive gastroparesis represents a subset who often have other autoimmune symptoms or disorders, but less severe nausea and vomiting.

Abstract Background Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) for treating gastroparesis symptoms is controversial. Methods We studied 319 idiopathic or diabetic gastroparesis symptom patients from the Gastroparesis Clinical Research Consortium (GpCRC) observational studies: 238 without GES and 81 with GES. We assessed the effects of GES using change in GCSI total score and nausea/vomiting subscales between baseline and 48 weeks. We used propensity score methods to control for imbalances in patient characteristics between comparison groups. Key Results GES patients were clinically worse (40% severe vs. 18% for non‐GES; P < .001); worse PAGI‐QOL (2.2. vs. 2.6; P = .003); and worse GCSI total scores (3.5 vs. 2.8; P < .001). We observed improvements in 48‐week GCSI total scores for GES vs. non‐GES: improvement by ≥ 1‐point (RR = 1.63; 95% CI = (1.14, 2.33); P = .01) and change from enrollment (difference = −0.5 (−0.8, −0.3); P < .001). When adjusting for patient characteristics, symptom scores were smaller and not statistically significant: improvement by ≥ 1‐point (RR = 1.29 (0.88, 1.90); P = .20) and change from the enrollment (difference = −0.3 (−0.6, 0.0); P = .07). Of the individual items, the nausea improved by ≥ 1 point (RR = 1.31 (1.03, 1.67); P = .04). Patients with GCSI score ≥ 3.0 tended to improve more than those with score < 3.0. (Adjusted P = 0.02). Conclusions and Inferences This multicenter study of gastroparesis patients found significant improvements in gastroparesis symptoms among GES patients. Accounting for imbalances in patient characteristics, only nausea remained significant. Patients with greater symptoms at baseline improved more after GES. A much larger sample of patients is needed to fully evaluate symptomatic responses and to identify patients likely to respond to GES.