Gastric Electrical Stimulation (GES) with Parameters for Morbid Obesity Elevates Lower Esophageal Sphincter (LES) Pressure in Conscious Dogs

Use of Bioelectronics in the Gastrointestinal Tract

Gastrointestinal (GI) motility disorders are major contributing factors to functional GI diseases that account for >40% of patients seen in gastroenterology clinics and affect >20% of the general population. The autonomic and enteric nervous systems and the muscles within the luminal GI tract have key roles in motility. In health, this complex integrated system works seamlessly to transport liquid, solid, and gas through the GI tract. However, major and minor motility disorders occur when these systems fail. Common functional GI motility disorders include dysphagia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, functional dyspepsia, gastroparesis, chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction, postoperative ileus, irritable bowel syndrome, functional diarrhea, functional constipation, and fecal incontinence. Although still in its infancy, bioelectronic therapy in the GI tract holds great promise through the targeted stimulation of nerves and muscles.

Ameliorating Effects of Transcutaneous Electrical Acustimulation Combined With Deep Breathing Training on Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Mediated via the Autonomic Pathway

AIMS

To investigate the effects and possible mechanisms of transcutaneous electrical acustimulation (TEA) combined with deep breathing training (DBT) on refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease (rGERD).

METHODS

Twenty-one patients with rGERD were recruited and randomly assigned to receive either only esomeprazole (ESO, 20 mg bid) (group A, n = 7), TEA + DBT + ESO (group B, n = 7), or sham-TEA + DBT + ESO (group C, n = 7) in a four-week study. The reflux diagnostic questionnaire (RDQ) score and heart rate variability (HRV) were recorded and evaluated at baseline and at the end of each treatment. Blood samples were collected for the measurement of serum acetylcholine (Ach) and nitric oxide (NO). Esophageal manometry and 24-hour pH monitoring were performed before and after the treatment.

RESULTS

After treatment, 1) the participants in group B had significantly lower scores of RDQ and DeMeester and increased lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP) than those in group C (all p < 0.05), suggesting the role of TEA; 2) low frequency band (LF)/(LF + HF) ratio in groups B and C was decreased, compared with group A (p = 0.010, p = 0.042, respectively); high frequency band (HF)/(LF + HF) ratio in B and C groups was significantly increased, compared with group A (p = 0.010, p = 0.042, respectively); 3) The serum Ach in groups B and C was significantly higher than group A (p = 0.022, p = 0.046, respectively); the serum NO in groups B and C was significantly lower than group A (p = 0.010, p = 0.027, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

TEA combined with the DBT can effectively improve the reflux symptoms in rGERD patients by increasing LESP and reducing gastroesophageal reflux, which may be mediated via the autonomic and enteric mechanisms.

Electrical therapies for gastrointestinal motility disorders

Gastrointestinal (GI) motility disorders are common in clinical settings, including esophageal motility disorders, gastroesophageal reflux disease, functional dyspepsia, gastroparesis, chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction, post-operative ileus, irritable bowel syndrome, diarrhea and constipation. While a number of drugs have been developed for treating GI motility disorders, few are currently available. Emerging electrical stimulation methods may provide new treatment options for these GI motility disorders. Areas covered: This review gives an overview of electrical therapies that have been, and are being developed for GI motility disorders, including gastroesophageal reflux, functional dyspepsia, gastroparesis, intestinal motility disorders and constipation. Various methods of gastrointestinal electrical stimulation are introduced. A few methods of nerve stimulation have also been described, including spinal cord stimulation and sacral nerve stimulation. Potentials of electrical therapies for obesity are also discussed. PubMed was searched using keywords and their combinations: electrical stimulation, spinal cord stimulation, sacral nerve stimulation, gastrointestinal motility and functional gastrointestinal diseases. Expert commentary: Electrical stimulation is an area of great interest and has potential for treating GI motility disorders. However, further development in technologies (devices suitable for GI stimulation) and extensive clinical research are needed to advance the field and bring electrical therapies to bedside.

Effect of electrical stimulation of the LES on LES pressure in a canine model

Gastric electrical stimulation modulates lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP). High-frequency neural stimulation (NES) can induce gut smooth muscle contractions. To determine whether lower esophageal sphincter (LES) electrical stimulation (ES) can affect LESP, bipolar electrodes were implanted in the LES of four dogs. Esophageal manometry during sham or ES was performed randomly on separate days. Four stimuli were used: 1) low-frequency: 350-ms pulses at 6 cycles/min; 2) high-frequency-1: 1-ms pulses at 50 Hz; 3) high-frequency-2: 1-ms pulses at 20 Hz; and 4) NES: 20-ms bipolar pulses at 50 Hz. Recordings were obtained postprandially. Tests consisted of three 20-min periods: baseline, stimulation/sham, and poststimulation. The effect of NES was tested under anesthesia and following IV administration of l-NAME and atropine. Area under the curve (AUC) and LESP were compared among the three periods, by ANOVA and t-test, P < 0.05. Data are shown as means +/- SD. We found that low-frequency stimulation caused a sustained increase in LESP: 32.1 +/- 12.9 (prestimulation) vs. 43.2 +/- 18.0 (stimulation) vs. 50.1 +/- 23.8 (poststimulation), P < 0.05. AUC significantly increased during and after stimulation. There were no significant changes with other types of ES. With NES, LESP initially rose and then decreased below baseline (LES relaxation). During NES, N(G)-nitro-l-arginine methyl ester increased both resting LESP and the initial rise in LESP and markedly diminished the relaxation. Atropine lowered resting LESP and abolished the initial rise in LESP. In conclusion, low frequency ES of the LES increases LESP in conscious dogs. NES has dual effect on LESP: an initial stimulation, cholinergically mediated, followed by relaxation mediated by nitric oxide.

Systematic review: applications and future of gastric electrical stimulation

BACKGROUND

Over the past 20 years, gastric electrical stimulation has received increasing attention among researchers and clinicians.

AIM

To give a systematic review on the effects, mechanisms and applications of gastric electrical stimulation.

METHODS

Medline was used to identify the articles to be included in this review. Key words used for the search included gastric electrical stimulation, gastric pacing, electrical stimulation, stomach, gastrointestinal motility, central nervous system, gastroparesis, nausea and vomiting; obesity and weight loss. Combinational uses of these keywords were made to identify relevant articles. Most of the articles included in this review ranged from 1985 to 2006.

RESULTS

Based on the general search, the review was structured as follows: (i) peripheral and central effects and mechanisms of gastric electrical stimulation; (ii) clinical applications of gastric electrical stimulation for gastroparesis and obesity and (iii) future development of gastric electrical stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Great progress has been made during the past decades. Gastric electrical stimulation has been shown to be effective in normalizing gastric dysrhythmia, accelerating gastric emptying and improving nausea and vomiting. Implantable device has been made available for treating gastroparesis as well as obesity. However, development of a new device and controlled clinical studies are required to further prove clinical efficacy of gastric electrical stimulation.