Citations

AbstractBackgroundAutonomic dysfunction can be present in patients with idiopathic and diabetic gastroparesis. The role of autonomic dysfunction relating to gastric emptying and upper gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with gastroparesis and chronic unexplained nausea and vomiting (CUNV) remains unclear. The aim of our study is to evaluate autonomic function in patients with gastroparesis and CUNV with respect to etiology, gastric emptying and symptom severity.MethodsWe studied 242 patients with chronic gastroparetic symptoms recruited at eight centers. All patients had a gastric emptying scintigraphy within 6 months of the study. Symptom severity was assessed using the gastroparesis cardinal symptom index. Autonomic function testing was performed at baseline enrollment using the ANX 3.0 autonomic monitoring system which measures heart rate variability and respiratory activity measurements.Key ResultsLow sympathetic response to challenge (Valsalva or standing) was the most common abnormality seen impacting 89% diabetic and 74% idiopathic patients. Diabetics compared to idiopathics, exhibited greater global hypofunction with sympathetic (OR = 4.7, 95% CI 2.2‐10.3; P < .001) and parasympathetic (OR = 7.2, 95% CI 3.4‐15.0; P < .001) dysfunction. Patients with delayed gastric emptying were more likely to have paradoxic parasympathetic excessive during sympathetic challenge [(Valsalva or standing) 40% vs. 26%, P = .05]. Patients with more severe symptoms exhibited greater parasympathetic dysfunction compared to those with mild‐moderate symptoms: resting sympathovagal balance [LFa/RFa 1.8 (1.0‐3.1) vs. 1.2 (0.6‐2.3), P = .006)] and standing parasympathetic activity [0.4 (0.1‐0.8) vs. 0.6 (0.2‐1.7); P = .03].ConclusionsAutonomic dysfunction was common in patients with gastroparesis and CUNV. Parasympathetic dysfunction was associated with delayed gastric emptying and more severe upper gastrointestinal symptoms. Conversely, sympathetic hypofunction was associated with milder symptoms.InferencesGastroparesis and CUNV may be a manifestation of GI autonomic dysfunction or imbalance, such that sympathetic dysfunction occurs early on in the manifestation of chronic upper GI symptoms, while parasympathetic dysfunction results in more severe symptoms and delayed gastric emptying.

OBJECTIVES: Diabetic gastroparesis (Gp) occurs more often in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) than in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Other diabetic end-organ complications include peripheral neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy (together termed triopathy ). This study determines the prevalence of diabetic complications (retinopathy, nephropathy, and peripheral neuropathy) in diabetic patients with symptoms of Gp, assessing the differences between T1DM and T2DM and delayed and normal gastric emptying (GE). METHODS: Diabetic patients with symptoms of Gp underwent history and physical examination, GE scintigraphy, electrogastrography with water load, autonomic function testing, and questionnaires assessing symptoms and peripheral neuropathy. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-three diabetic patients with symptoms of Gp were studied: 59 with T1DM and 74 with T2DM and 103 with delayed GE and 30 without delayed GE. The presence of retinopathy (37% vs 24%; P = 0.13), nephropathy (19% vs 11%; P = 0.22), and peripheral neuropathy (53% vs 39%; P = 0.16) was not significantly higher in T1DM than in T2DM; however, triopathies (all 3 complications together) were seen in 10% of T1DM and 3% of T2DM ( P = 0.04). Diabetic patients with delayed GE had increased prevalence of retinopathy (36% vs 10%; P = 0.006) and number of diabetic complications (1.0 vs 0.5; P = 0.009); however, 39% of diabetic patients with delayed GE did not have any diabetic complications. DISCUSSION: In diabetic patients with symptoms of Gp, delayed GE was associated with the presence of retinopathy and the total number of diabetic complications. Only 10% of patients with T1DM and 3% of those with T2DM had triopathy of complications, and 39% of diabetic patients with Gp did not have any diabetic complications. Thus, the presence of diabetic complications should raise awareness for Gp in either T1DM or T2DM; however, diabetic Gp frequently occurs without other diabetic complications.

Abstract Background Symptoms induced by caloric or non‐caloric satiety test meals and gastric myoelectrical activity (GMA) have not been studied in patients with diabetic gastroparesis (DGP) before and after intense glucose management. Aims We determined the effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) on GI symptoms, volume consumed, and GMA induced by the caloric meal satiety test (CMST) and water load satiety test (WLST) in DGP. Methods Forty‐five patients with DGP underwent CMST and WLST at baseline and 24 weeks after CSII with CGM. Subjects ingested the test meals until they were completely full. Visual analog scales were used to quantify pre‐ and postmeal symptoms, and GMA was recorded with cutaneous electrodes and analyzed visually and by computer. Key Results At baseline and 24‐week visits, nausea, bloating, abdominal discomfort, and fullness were immediately increased after CMST and WLST (Ps < 0.01). The meal volumes ingested were significantly less than normal controls at both visits in almost one‐third of the subjects. After the CMST, the percentage 3 cycle per minute GMA increased and bradygastria decreased compared with WLST (Ps < 0.05). After treatment for 24 weeks meal volumes ingested, postmeal symptoms and GMA were no different than baseline. Conclusions and inferences (a) Satiety test meals elicited symptoms of nausea, bloating, and abdominal discomfort; (b) CMST stimulated more symptoms and changes in GMA than WLST; and (c) CSII with CGM for 24 weeks did not improve symptoms, volumes ingested, or GMA elicited by the two satiety test meals in these patients with diabetic GP. Satiety tests in diabetic gastropresis are useful to study acute postprandial symptoms and GMA, but these measures were not improved by intensive insulin therapy.

Abstract Background Wireless motility capsule ( WMC ) findings are incompletely defined in suspected gastroparesis. We aimed to characterize regional WMC transit and contractility in relation to scintigraphy, etiology, and symptoms in patients undergoing gastric emptying testing. Methods A total of 209 patients with gastroparesis symptoms at NIDDK Gastroparesis Consortium centers underwent gastric scintigraphy and WMC s on separate days to measure regional transit and contractility. Validated questionnaires quantified symptoms. Key Results Solid scintigraphy and liquid scintigraphy were delayed in 68.8% and 34.8% of patients; WMC gastric emptying times ( GET ) were delayed in 40.3% and showed 52.8% agreement with scintigraphy; 15.5% and 33.5% had delayed small bowel ( SBTT ) and colon transit ( CTT ) times. Transit was delayed in ≥2 regions in 23.3%. Rapid transit was rarely observed. Diabetics had slower GET but more rapid SBTT versus idiopathics ( P ≤ .02). GET delays related to greater scintigraphic retention, slower SBTT , and fewer gastric contractions ( P ≤ .04). Overall gastroparesis symptoms and nausea/vomiting, early satiety/fullness, bloating/distention, and upper abdominal pain subscores showed no relation to WMC transit. Upper and lower abdominal pain scores ( P ≤ .03) were greater with increased colon contractions. Constipation correlated with slower CTT and higher colon contractions ( P = .03). Diarrhea scores were higher with delayed SBTT and CTT ( P ≤ .04). Conclusions & Inferences Wireless motility capsules define gastric emptying delays similar but not identical to scintigraphy that are more severe in diabetics and relate to reduced gastric contractility. Extragastric transit delays occur in >40% with suspected gastroparesis. Gastroparesis symptoms show little association with WMC profiles, although lower symptoms relate to small bowel or colon abnormalities.

AbstractBackgroundEarly satiety (ES) and postprandial fullness (PPF) are often present in gastroparesis, but the importance of these symptoms in gastroparesis has not been well‐described. The aims were: (i) Characterize ES and PPF in patients with gastroparesis. (ii) Assess relationships of ES and PPF with etiology of gastroparesis, quality of life, body weight, gastric emptying, and water load testing.MethodsGastroparetic patients filled out questionnaires assessing symptoms (PAGI‐SYM) and quality of life (PAGI‐QOL, SF‐36v2). Patients underwent gastric emptying scintigraphy and water load testing.Key Results198 patients with gastroparesis (134 IG, 64 DG) were evaluated. Early satiety was severe or very severe in 50% of patients. Postprandial fullness was severe or very severe in 60% of patients. Severity scores for ES and PPF were similar between idiopathic and diabetic gastroparesis. Increasing severity of ES and PPF were associated with other gastroparesis symptoms including nausea/vomiting, satiety/early fullness, bloating, and upper abdominal pain and GERD subscores. Increasing severity of ES and PPF were associated with increasing gastroparesis severity, decreased BMI, decreased quality of life from PAGI‐QOL and SF‐36 physical health. Increasing severity of ES and PPF were associated with increasing gastric retention of a solid meal and decreased volume during water load test.Conclusions & InferencesEarly satiety and PPF are commonly severe symptoms in both diabetic and idiopathic gastroparesis. Early satiety and PPF severity are associated with other gastroparesis symptom severities, body weight, quality of life, gastric emptying, and water load testing. Thus, ES and PPF are important symptoms characterizing gastroparesis. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT NCT01696747.

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.