EUS guidance in gastric pacemaker implantation

Gastric electrical stimulation for gastroparesis: a goal greatly pursued, but not yet attained

The lack of an effective medical treatment for gastroparesis has pushed the research of new techniques of gastric electrical stimulation (GES) for nearly half a century of experimentation with a large variety of electrical stimuli delivered to the gastric wall of animals and patients with gastroparesis. Three principal methods are currently available: gastric low-frequency/high-energy GES with long pulse stimulation, high-frequency/low-energy GES with short pulse stimulation and neural sequential GES. The first method aims to reset a regular slow wave rhythm, but has variable effects on contractions and requires devices with large and heavy batteries unsuitable for implantation. High-frequency/low-energy GES, although inadequate to restore a normal gastric electro-mechanical activity, improves dyspeptic symptoms, such as nausea and vomiting, giving patients a better quality of life together with a more satisfactory nutritional status and is suitable for implantation. Unfortunately, the numerous clinical studies using this type of GES, with the exception of two, were not controlled and there is a need for definitive verification of the effectiveness of this technique to justify the cost and the risks of this procedure. The last method, which is neural sequential GES, consists of a microprocessor-controlled sequential activation of a series of annular electrodes along the distal two thirds of the stomach and is able to induce propagated contractions causing forceful emptying of the gastric content. The latter method is the most promising, but has been used only in animals and needs to be tested in patients with gastroparesis before it is regarded as a solution for this disease.

Methods of gastric electrical stimulation and pacing: a review of their benefits and mechanisms of action in gastroparesis and obesity

Development of gastric electrical stimulation techniques for treatment of gastric dysmotility syndromes and obesity has been a long-standing goal of investigators and clinicians. Depending on stimulus parameters and sites of stimulation, such methods have a range of theoretical benefits including entrainment of intrinsic gastric electrical activity, eliciting propagating contractions and reducing symptomatology in patients with gastroparesis and reducing appetite and food intake in individuals with morbid obesity. Additionally, gastric stimulation parameters have extragastrointestinal effects including alteration of systemic hormonal and autonomic neural activity and modulation of afferent nerve pathways projecting to the central nervous system that may represent important mechanisms of action. Numerous case series and smaller numbers of controlled trials suggest clinical benefits in these two conditions, however better controlled trials are mandated to confirm their efficacy. Current research is focusing on novel stimulation methods to better control symptoms in gastroparesis and promote weight reduction in morbid obesity.

Gastric motor dysfunction: is eosinophilic mural gastritis a causative factor?

Delayed gastric emptying caused either by gastric motor dysfunction or by gastroparesis is a profoundly debilitating disorder. When unresponsive to medical therapy, patients may undergo radical surgery including near-total gastro-oesophageal, with varied symptomatic improvement. We describe two patients who presented with symptoms consistent with gastro-oesophageal reflux, unresponsive to medical management. After fundoplication both developed symptoms of profound gastric motor dysfunction and subsequently proceeded to near-total gastro-oesophageal with symptomatic improvement. Histological examination of both excised gastric specimens revealed eosinophilic mural gastritis. To our knowledge, these are the first cases to demonstrate the association of mural eosinophilia and symptomatic gastric motor dysfunction. We propose that patients with gastric motor dysfunction, refractory to medical management, progress to laparoscopy and mural biopsy before gastrectomy. This would allow histological analysis of the gastric wall, and in the event of a positive finding of mural eosinophilic gastritis would allow a trial of medical therapy that could include an eosinophilic stabilizer such as the leukotriene D4 receptor antagonist montelukast or intravenous corticosteroid therapy, which may alleviate the symptoms.

Further experience with gastric stimulation to treat drug refractory gastroparesis

BACKGROUND

Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) has been introduced for patients with gastroparesis refractory to pharmacological therapy.

METHODS

From April 1998 until November 2001, 55 patients underwent GES implantation at Kansas University Medical Center. All patients had prolonged gastric retention of a solid meal by scintigraphy at baseline. The etiologies were diabetes mellitus in 39, related to previous surgery in 9, and idiopathic in 7. Symptoms were graded using a 5-point scale and quality of life was assessed with the SF-36 questionnaire. Body mass index and nutritional parameters were monitored. Hemoglobin A1C was measured in the diabetic patients.

RESULTS

Total symptom scores and the physical and mental composite scores of quality of life improved significantly. On average, gastric emptying did not change. Body mass index and body weight increased significantly. And days spent in hospital admissions were significantly decreased. At 1 year, diabetic patients experienced reduced hemoglobin A1C. Four devices were removed. One patient died of a pulmonary embolus postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large series of patients with gastroparesis, GES significantly improved symptoms and quality of life.