Electrical stimulation - an evolving concept in the treatment of colonic motor dysfunctions

Comparison of the effects of colonic electrical stimulation and prucalopride on gastrointestinal transit and defecation in a canine model of constipation

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of colonic electrical stimulation (CES) and prucalopride on gastrointestinal transit and defecation and to verify the safety of CES in a canine model of constipation.

METHODS

Eight beagles received CES implantation and induction drugs for slow transit constipation (STC). In the STC model, the gastrointestinal transit time (GITT), colonic transit time (CTT), stool frequency and stool consistency were assessed to compare the effects of CES and prucalopride on gastrointestinal transit and defecation. The histocompatibility of the implantable device was evaluated.

RESULTS

The individualized parameters for CES varied greatly among the animals, and the GITTs were not significantly shortened by CES or prucalopride; however, both the CES and prucalopride treatment significantly accelerated CTT and improved stool consistency compared with sham stimulation. CES treatment also resulted in significantly higher stool frequency than prucalopride treatment, which did not significantly change the stool frequency. No severe inflammation response was detected in the gross and microscopic appearance around the implants.

CONCLUSION

CES and prucalopride treatment may yield similar short-term effects for improving gastrointestinal transit and stool consistency, and CES outperformed prucalopride treatment in terms of defecation inducement in the short term. There were ideal levels of endurance and histocompatibility for the animals that underwent CES.

Effects of experimental colitis in rats on incretin levels, inflammatory markers, and enteric neuronal function

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to assess the effects of chronic inflammation on incretin levels, inflammatory markers, and enteric neuronal function measured in isolated preparations of smooth muscle of rat.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We induced experimental colitis using 2,4-dinitrobenzenesulfonic acid (DNBS) in 17 Albino male Sprague-Dawley rats, while 16 rats were used as a control. They were housed in temperature-controlled rooms in a 12-h light/dark cycle at 22-24°C and 50 to 60% humidity. We evaluated in both inflamed and healthy rats: fasting plasma glucose concentration, fasting plasma insulin, myeloperoxidase, active glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP), glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), and GLP-2 levels, adiponectin, and C-reactive protein (CRP). We also evaluated colonic longitudinal smooth muscle contractile activity.

RESULTS

Intrarectal administration of DNBS reduced body weight gain in inflamed rats. We recorded higher levels of fasting plasma glucose, and insulin in inflamed rats. We observed higher levels of myeloperoxidase and CRP, and lower levels of ADN in inflamed rats. We recorded higher levels of GIP, GLP-1, and GLP-2 in inflamed rats compared to the healthy ones. Regarding functional response of colon intestinal smooth muscle after electrical stimulation, we recorded a lower functional response of colon intestinal smooth muscle after electrical stimulation in inflamed rats.

CONCLUSIONS

We can conclude that chronic inflammation leads to an increase of incretin levels and to a decrease of functional response of colon intestinal smooth muscle after electrical stimulation.

Colonic electrical stimulation promotes colonic motility through regeneration of myenteric plexus neurons in slow transit constipation beagles

Slow transit constipation (STC) is a common disease characterized by markedly delayed colonic transit time as a result of colonic motility dysfunction. It is well established that STC is mostly caused by disorders of relevant nerves, especially the enteric nervous system (ENS). Colonic electrical stimulation (CES) has been regarded as a valuable alternative for the treatment of STC. However, little report focuses on the underlying nervous mechanism to normalize the delayed colonic emptying and relieve symptoms. In the present study, the therapeutic effect and the influence on ENS triggered by CES were investigated in STC beagles. The STC beagle model was established by oral administration of diphenoxylate/atropine and alosetron. Histopathology, electron microscopy, immunohistochemistry, Western blot analysis and immunofluorescence were used to evaluate the influence of pulse train CES on myenteric plexus neurons. After 5 weeks of treatment, CES could enhance the colonic electromyogram (EMG) signal to promote colonic motility, thereby improving the colonic content emptying of STC beagles. HE staining and transmission electron microscopy confirmed that CES could regenerate ganglia and synaptic vesicles in the myenteric plexus. Immunohistochemical staining showed that synaptophysin (SYP), protein gene product 9.5 (PGP9.5), cathepsin D (CAD) and S-100B in the colonic intramuscular layer were up-regulated by CES. Western blot analysis and immunofluorescence further proved that CES induced the protein expression of SYP and PGP9.5. Taken together, pulse train CES could induce the regeneration of myenteric plexus neurons, thereby promoting the colonic motility in STC beagles.

Effect of retrograde colonic electrical stimulation on colonic transit and stress-induced visceral hypersensitivity in rats with irritable bowel syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of retrograde colonic electrical stimulation (RCES) with trains of short pulses and RCES with long pulses on colonic transit in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) rats and to investigate whether stress-induced visceral hypersensitivity could be alleviated by RCES so as to find a valuable new approach for IBS treatment.

METHODS

A total of 48 male rats were randomly divided into model group and control group. Visceral hypersensitivity model was induced by a 6-day HIS protocol composed of two stressors, restraint stress for 40 min and forced swimming stress for 20 min. The extent of visceral hypersensitivity was quantified by electromyography and abdominal withdrawal reflex scores (AWRs) of colorectal distension (use a balloon) at different pressures. After the modeling, all rats were equipped with electrodes in descending colon for retrograde electrical stimulation and a PE tube for perfusing phenol red saline solution in the ileocecus. After recovering from surgery, RCES with long pulses, RCES with trains of short pulses, and sham RCES were performed in colonic serosa of rats for 40 min in six groups of 8 each, including three groups of visceral hypersensitivity rats and three groups of health rats. Colonic transit was assessed by calculating the output of phenol red from the anus every 10 min for 90 min. Finally, the extent of visceral hypersensitivity will be quantified again in model group.

RESULTS

After the 6-day HIS protocol, the HIS rats displayed an increased sensitivity to colorectal distention, compared to control group at different distention pressures (P < 0.01). CRES with trains of short pulses and long pulses significantly attenuated the hypersensitive responses to colorectal distention in the HIS rats compared with sham RCES group (P < 0.01). The effects of RCES on rats colon transmission: In the IBS rats, the colonic emptying were (77.4 ± 3.4)%, (74.8 ± 2.4)% and (64.2 ± 1.6)% in the sham RCES group, long pulses group and trains of short pulses group at 90 min; In healthy rats, The colonic emptying was (65.2 ± 3.5)%, (63.5 ± 4.0)% and (54.0 ± 2.5)% in the sham RCES group, long pulses group and trains of short pulses group at 90 min.

CONCLUSION

RCES with long pulses and RCES with trains of short pulses can significantly alleviate stress-induced visceral hypersensitivity. RCES with trains of short pulses has an inhibitory effect of colonic transit, both in visceral hypersensitivity rats and healthy rats.

Effects of colonic electrical stimulation using different individual parameter patterns and stimulation sites on gastrointestinal transit time, defecation, and food intake

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the effects of colonic electrical stimulation (CES) on gastrointestinal transit time (GITT), energy consumption, stool frequency, stool consistency, and food intake using different individual parameter patterns and stimulation sites.

METHODS

Eight beagle dogs underwent surgery and CES. First, CES was conducted to determine the individual parameters with different pulse configurations, based on symptoms. Second, influences on energy consumption and GITT were compared between CES sessions with different pulse configurations. Third, GITT, stool frequency, stool consistency, and food intake were compared to assess the effects of CES at different stimulation sites.

RESULTS

The individual parameters varied greatly among the dogs. In proximal colon electrical stimulation (PCES) and rectosigmoid colon electrical stimulation (RCES), energy consumption was lower with the constant pulse width mode than with the constant pulse amplitude mode (p = 0.012 and p = 0.018, respectively). There was no statistical difference between the two pulse configurations in GITT assessment. The PCES, RCES, and sequential CES sessions significantly accelerated GITT compared to sham stimulation. There was no statistical difference in GITT between PCES, RCES, and sequential CES sessions. Compared to sham CES session, RCES and sequential CES sessions exhibited significant higher stool frequency (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively), and PCES and RCES sessions inhibited food intake (p = 0.003 and p = 0.002, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Constant pulse width mode is an appropriate pulse configuration for individual CES. At different stimulation sites, CES may exert different effects on stool frequency and food intake. This study provides an experimental basis for the clinical application of CES.

Advances in research of colonic electrical stimulation

In recent years great attention has been paid to the study of colonic electrical stimulation. Colonic electrical stimulation is expected to become a valuable option for treatment of gastrointestinal dysfunction. This article reviews the classification, mechanisms and clinical applications of colonic electrical stimulation.

Colonic electrical stimulation: potential use for treatment of delayed colonic transit

AIM

Recently there has been an increased interest in using electrical stimulation to regulate gut motility generally and particularly for the treatment of slow-transit constipation. In this preliminary canine study, we aimed to study the effects of colonic electrical stimulation (CES) on colonic motility and transit.

METHOD

Nine dogs, each equipped with a pair of serosal colon electrodes and a proximal colon cannula were randomized to receive: (i) sham-CES, (ii) long pulse CES (20 cpm, 300 ms, 6 mA) or (iii) pulse train CES (40 Hz, 6 ms, 6 mA). Animals underwent assessment of colonic contractions via manometry, and of colonic transit by inserting 24 radiopaque markers via the colonic cannula and radiographically monitoring the markers at 2, 4 and 6 h following their insertion. The colonic transit was assessed by the geometric centre.

RESULTS

We found that, compared with sham-CES, pulse train CES, but not long pulse CES, significantly increased the overall colonic motility index twofold and accelerated the colonic transit by 104% at 2 h, by 60% at 4 h and by 31% at 6 h (P = 0.01, P = 0.02 and P = 0.03 vs sham-CES at 2, 4 and 6 h, respectively). The accelerating effect of pulse train CES was found to be mediated via both cholinergic and nitrergic pathways.

CONCLUSION

CES with pulse trains has prokinetic effects on colonic contractions and transit in healthy dogs, mediated via the cholinergic and nitrergic pathways. Further clinical studies are warranted to explore the therapeutic potential of CES for slow colonic transit constipation.

Does magnetic stimulation of sacral nerve roots modify colonic motility? Results of a randomized double-blind sham-controlled study

Although sacral nerve root stimulation (SNS) can result in a symptomatic improvement of faecal incontinence, the mechanism of action remains unknown. The aim of this study was to assess whether short-term magnetic SNS can inhibit pharmacologically induced propulsive colonic contractions. Twelve healthy volunteers (median age: 43.5 years old) were studied on two separate occasions and randomized into either active (15 Hz, 100% output intensity for 5 s min(-1) for 30 min) or sham rapid rate lumbosacral magnetic stimulation (rLSMS). Colorectal motility was recorded with a manometric catheter located at the most proximal transducer in the left colon and the most distal, in the rectum. Colonic contractions were provoked by instilling Bisacodyl. The effects of rLSMS on colonic, sigmoid and rectal contractions were monitored and recorded after Bisacodyl instillation. The appearance of high-amplitude contractions propagated or not (HAC/HAPC) provoked by Bisacodyl instillation was significantly delayed during active compared to sham stimulation (P = 0.03). There was no difference in the characteristics of HAC/HAPC (i.e. frequency, amplitude, duration, velocity of propagation) or the motility index with active or sham stimulation. The perception of urgency tended to be decreased with rLSMS following Bisacodyl instillation. The catheter was expulsed within a median of 16.5 min (range 8-39) after Bisacodyl administration during active stimulation compared to 14 min (range 5-40) during sham stimulation (P = 0.03). This study suggests that rLSMS could delay the appearance of the first Bisacodyl-induced colonic contractions.

Gastrointestinal electrical stimulation for treatment of gastrointestinal disorders: gastroparesis, obesity, fecal incontinence, and constipation

Electrical stimulation of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is an attractive concept. Since these organs have their own natural pacemakers, the electrical signals they generate can be altered by externally delivering electric currents by intramuscular, serosal, or intraluminal electrodes to specific sites in the GI tract. This article reviews the advances in electrical stimulation of the GI tract by describing various methods of GI electrical stimulation and their peripheral and central effects and mechanisms; updating the status of GI electrical stimulation in the clinical settings of gastroparesis, obesity, fecal incontinence, and constipation; and predicting future directions and developments of GI electrical stimulation technology and their areas of possible clinical applications.