Hasler, William L.

AbstractBackgroundNausea and vomiting are classic symptoms of gastroparesis. It remains unclear if characteristics of nausea and vomiting are similar in different etiologies of gastroparesis. The aims of this article were as follows: to describe characteristics of nausea and vomiting in patients with gastroparesis and to determine if there are differences in nausea and vomiting in diabetic (DG) and idiopathic gastroparesis (IG).MethodsGastroparetic patients enrolling in the NIDDK Gastroparesis Registry underwent assessment with history and questionnaires assessing symptoms, quality of life, and a questionnaire characterizing nausea and vomiting.Key ResultsOf 159 gastroparesis patients (107 IG, 52 DG), 96% experienced nausea, whereas 65% experienced vomiting. Nausea was predominant symptom in 28% and vomiting was predominant in 4%. Nausea was severe or very severe in 41%. PAGI‐SYM nausea/vomiting subscore was greater with increased vomiting severity, but not nausea severity in DG than IG. Nausea was related to meals in 71%; lasting most of the day in 41%. Increasing nausea severity was related to decreased quality of life. Nausea often preceded vomiting in 82% of patients and vomiting often relieved nausea in 30%. Vomiting was more common in DG (81%) compared to IG (57%; p = 0.004). Diabetic patients more often had vomiting in the morning before eating, during the night, and when not eating.Conclusions & InferencesNausea is present in essentially all patients with gastroparesis irrespective of cause and associated with decreased quality of life. In contrast, vomiting was more prevalent, more severe, and occurred more often in DG than IG. Thus, characteristics of vomiting differ in IG vs DG.

Abstract Background In studies of diabetic gastroparesis, patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1 DM , T2 DM ) are often combined for analyses. We compared gastroparesis severity, healthcare utilization, psychological function, and quality of life in T1 DM vs T2 DM gastroparesis patients. Methods Questionnaire, laboratory, and scintigraphy data from patients with gastroparesis and T1 DM and T2 DM from seven centers of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Gastroparesis Clinical Research Consortium Registry were compared at enrollment and after 48 weeks. Multiple regression models assessed baseline and follow‐up differences between diabetes subtypes. Key Results At baseline, T1 DM patients ( N = 78) had slower gastric emptying, more hospitalizations, more gastric stimulator implantations, higher hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and more anxiety vs T2 DM patients ( N = 59). Independent discriminators of patients with T1 DM vs T2 DM included worse gastroesophageal reflux disease, less bloating, more peripheral neuropathy, and fewer comorbidities ( p ≤ 0.05). On follow‐up, gastrointestinal ( GI ) symptom scores decreased only in T2 DM ( p < 0.05), but not in T1 DM patients who reported greater prokinetic, proton pump inhibitor, anxiolytic, and gastric stimulator usage over 48 weeks ( p ≤ 0.03). Gastrointestinal symptoms at baseline and 48 weeks with both subtypes were not associated with HbA1c, peripheral neuropathy, psychological factors, or quality of life. Conclusions & Inferences Baseline symptoms were similar in T1 DM and T2 DM patients, even though T1 DM patients had worse gastric emptying delays and higher HbA1c suggesting other factors mediate symptom severity. Symptom scores at 48 weeks decreased in T2 DM , but not T1 DM patients, despite increased medical and surgical treatment utilization by T1 DM patients. Defining causes of different outcomes in diabetic gastroparesis warrants further investigation.

SummaryBackgroundThe wireless motility capsule (WMC) offers the ability to investigate luminal gastrointestinal (GI) physiology in a minimally invasive manner.AimTo investigate the effect of testing protocol, gender, age and study country on regional GI transit times and associated pH values using the WMC.MethodsRegional GI transit times and pH values were determined in 215 healthy volunteers from USA and Sweden studied using the WMC over a 6.5‐year period. The effects of test protocol, gender, age and study country were examined.ResultsFor GI transit times, testing protocol was associated with differences in gastric emptying time (GET; shorter with protocol 2 (motility capsule ingested immediately after meal) vs. protocol 1 (motility capsule immediately before): median difference: 52 min, P = 0.0063) and colonic transit time (CTT; longer with protocol 2: median 140 min, P = 0.0189), but had no overall effect on whole gut transit time. Females had longer GET (by median 17 min, P = 0.0307), and also longer CTT by (104 min, P = 0.0285) and whole gut transit time by (263 min, P = 0.0077). Increasing age was associated with shorter small bowel transit time (P = 0.002), and study country also influenced small bowel and CTTs. Whole gut and CTTs showed clustering of data at values separated by 24 h, suggesting that describing these measures as continuous variables is invalid. Testing protocol, gender and study country also significantly influenced pH values.ConclusionsRegional GI transit times and pH values, delineated using the wireless motility capsule (WMC), vary based on testing protocol, gender, age and country. Standardisation of testing is crucial for cross‐referencing in clinical practice and future research.

Abstract Background There is increasing evidence for specific cellular changes in the stomach of patients with diabetic ( DG ) and idiopathic ( IG ) gastroparesis. The most significant findings are loss of interstitial cells of Cajal ( ICC ), neuronal abnormalities, and an immune cellular infiltrate. Studies done in diabetic mice have shown a cytoprotective effect of CD 206+ M2 macrophages. To quantify overall immune cellular infiltrate, identify macrophage populations, and quantify CD 206+ and i NOS + cells. To investigate associations between cellular phenotypes and ICC . Methods Full thickness gastric body biopsies were obtained from non‐diabetic controls (C), diabetic controls ( DC ), DG , and IG patients. Sections were labeled for CD 45, CD 206, Kit, i NOS , and putative human macrophage markers ( HAM 56, CD 68, and EMR 1). Immunoreactive cells were quantified from the circular muscle layer. Key Results Significantly fewer ICC were detected in DG and IG tissues, but there were no differences in the numbers of cells immunoreactive for other markers between patient groups. There was a significant correlation between the number of CD 206+ cells and ICC in DG and DC patients, but not in C and IG and a significant correlation between i NOS + cells and ICC in the DC group, but not the other groups. CD 68 and HAM 56 reliably labeled the same cell populations, but EMR 1 labeled other cell types. Conclusions & Inferences Depletion of ICC and correlation with changes in CD 206+ cell numbers in DC and DG patients suggests that in humans, like mice, CD 206+ macrophages may play a cytoprotective role in diabetes. These findings may lead to novel therapeutic options, targeting alternatively activated macrophages.

AbstractBackgroundFactors associated with abdominal pain in gastroparesis are incompletely evaluated and comparisons of pain vs other symptoms are limited. This study related pain to clinical factors in gastroparesis and contrasted pain/discomfort‐ with nausea/vomiting‐predominant disease.MethodsClinical and scintigraphy data were compared in 393 patients from seven centers of the NIDDK Gastroparesis Clinical Research Consortium with moderate‐severe (Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorders Symptoms [PAGI‐SYM] score ≥3) vs none‐mild (PAGI‐SYM < 3) upper abdominal pain and predominant pain/discomfort vs nausea/vomiting.Key ResultsUpper abdominal pain was moderate‐severe in 261 (66%). Pain/discomfort was predominant in 81 (21%); nausea/vomiting was predominant in 172 (44%). Moderate‐severe pain was more prevalent with idiopathic gastroparesis and with lack of infectious prodrome (P ≤ 0.05) and correlated with scores for nausea/vomiting, bloating, lower abdominal pain/discomfort, bowel disturbances, and opiate and antiemetic use (P < 0.05), but not gastric emptying or diabetic neuropathy or control. Gastroparesis severity, quality of life, and depression and anxiety were worse with moderate‐severe pain (P ≤ 0.008). Factors associated with moderate‐severe pain were similar in diabetic and idiopathic gastroparesis. Compared to predominant nausea/vomiting, predominant pain/discomfort was associated with impaired quality of life, greater opiate, and less antiemetic use (P < 0.01), but similar severity and gastric retention.Conclusions & InferencesModerate‐severe abdominal pain is prevalent in gastroparesis, impairs quality of life, and is associated with idiopathic etiology, lack of infectious prodrome, and opiate use. Pain is predominant in one fifth of gastroparetics. Predominant pain has at least as great an impact on disease severity and quality of life as predominant nausea/vomiting.