Meal effects on gastric bioelectrical activity utilizing body surface gastric mapping in healthy subjects.

body surface gastric mapping electrogastrography gastric bioelectrical activity gastric slow waves gastrointestinal motility meal effects

Journal

Neurogastroenterology and motility
ISSN: 1365-2982
Titre abrégé: Neurogastroenterol Motil
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9432572

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 May 2024
Historique:
revised: 01 05 2024
received: 31 10 2023
accepted: 09 05 2024
medline: 20 5 2024
pubmed: 20 5 2024
entrez: 20 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Gastric sensorimotor disorders are prevalent. While gastric emptying measurements are commonly used, they may not fully capture the underlying pathophysiology. Body surface gastric mapping (BSGM) recently emerged to assess gastric sensorimotor dysfunction. This study assessed varying meal size on BSGM responses to inform test use in a wider variety of contexts. Data from multiple healthy cohorts receiving BSGM were pooled, using four different test meals. A standard BSGM protocol was employed: 30-min fasting, 4-h post-prandial, using Gastric Alimetry® (Alimetry, New Zealand). Meals comprised: (i) nutrient drink + oatmeal bar (482 kcal; 'standard meal'); (ii) oatmeal bar alone; egg and toast meal, and pancake (all ~250 kcal). Gastric Alimetry metrics included BMI-adjusted Amplitude, Principal Gastric Frequency, Gastric Alimetry Rhythm Index (GA-RI) and Fed:Fasted Amplitude Ratio (ff-AR). 238 participants (59.2% female) were included. All meals significantly increased amplitude and frequency during the first postprandial hour (p < 0.05). There were no differences in postprandial frequency across meals (p > 0.05). The amplitude and GA-RI of the standard meal (n = 110) were significantly higher than the energy bar alone (n = 45) and egg meal (n = 65) (all p < 0.05). All BSGM metrics were comparable across the three smaller meals (p > 0.05). A higher symptom burden was found in the oatmeal bar group versus the standard meal and pancake meal (p = 0.01, 0.003, respectively). The consumption of lower calorie meals elicited different postprandial responses, when compared to the standard Gastric Alimetry meal. These data will guide interpretations of BSGM when applied with lower calorie meals.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Gastric sensorimotor disorders are prevalent. While gastric emptying measurements are commonly used, they may not fully capture the underlying pathophysiology. Body surface gastric mapping (BSGM) recently emerged to assess gastric sensorimotor dysfunction. This study assessed varying meal size on BSGM responses to inform test use in a wider variety of contexts.
METHODS METHODS
Data from multiple healthy cohorts receiving BSGM were pooled, using four different test meals. A standard BSGM protocol was employed: 30-min fasting, 4-h post-prandial, using Gastric Alimetry® (Alimetry, New Zealand). Meals comprised: (i) nutrient drink + oatmeal bar (482 kcal; 'standard meal'); (ii) oatmeal bar alone; egg and toast meal, and pancake (all ~250 kcal). Gastric Alimetry metrics included BMI-adjusted Amplitude, Principal Gastric Frequency, Gastric Alimetry Rhythm Index (GA-RI) and Fed:Fasted Amplitude Ratio (ff-AR).
KEY RESULTS RESULTS
238 participants (59.2% female) were included. All meals significantly increased amplitude and frequency during the first postprandial hour (p < 0.05). There were no differences in postprandial frequency across meals (p > 0.05). The amplitude and GA-RI of the standard meal (n = 110) were significantly higher than the energy bar alone (n = 45) and egg meal (n = 65) (all p < 0.05). All BSGM metrics were comparable across the three smaller meals (p > 0.05). A higher symptom burden was found in the oatmeal bar group versus the standard meal and pancake meal (p = 0.01, 0.003, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES CONCLUSIONS
The consumption of lower calorie meals elicited different postprandial responses, when compared to the standard Gastric Alimetry meal. These data will guide interpretations of BSGM when applied with lower calorie meals.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38764250
doi: 10.1111/nmo.14823
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e14823

Subventions

Organisme : Health Research Council of New Zealand

Informations de copyright

© 2024 The Author(s). Neurogastroenterology & Motility published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Références

Piessevaux H, De Winter B, Louis E, et al. Dyspeptic symptoms in the general population: a factor and cluster analysis of symptom groupings. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2009;21(4):378‐388.
Sperber AD, Bangdiwala SI, Drossman DA, et al. Worldwide prevalence and burden of functional gastrointestinal disorders, results of Rome Foundation Global Study. Gastroenterology. 2021;160(1):99‐114. e113.
Huang IH, Schol J, Khatun R, et al. Worldwide prevalence and burden of gastroparesis‐like symptoms as defined by the United European Gastroenterology (UEG) and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) consensus on gastroparesis. United European Gastroenterol J. 2022;10:888‐897.
Camilleri M. Abnormal gastrointestinal motility is a major factor in explaining symptoms and a potential therapeutic target in patients with disorders of gut–brain interaction. Gut. 2023;72:2372‐2380.
Camilleri M, Kuo B, Nguyen L, et al. ACG clinical guideline: gastroparesis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022;117(8):1197‐1220.
Pasricha PJ, Grover M, Yates KP, et al. Functional dyspepsia and gastroparesis in tertiary care are interchangeable syndromes with common clinical and pathologic features. Gastroenterology. 2021;160(6):2006‐2017.
Carson DA KKL, O'Grady G, Du P, Gharibans AA, Andrews CN. Body surface mapping of the stomach: new directions for clinically evaluating gastric electrical activity. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2021;33:e14048.
Gharibans AA, Calder S, Varghese C, et al. Gastric dysfunction in patients with chronic nausea and vomiting syndromes defined by a noninvasive gastric mapping device. Sci Transl Med. 2022;14(663):eabq3544.
Calder S, Schamberg G, Varghese C, et al. An automated artifact detection and rejection system for body surface gastric mapping. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2022;34(11):e14421.
Ruenruaysab K, Calder S, Hayes T, O'Grady G, Gharibans A, Du P. Effects of anatomical variations on body surface gastric mapping. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2020;2020:2388‐2391.
Varghese C, Schamberg G, Calder S, et al. Normative values for body surface gastric mapping evaluations of gastric motility using gastric Alimetry: spectral analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022;118:1047‐1057.
Wang TH‐H, Tokhi A, Gharibans A, et al. Non‐invasive thoracoabdominal mapping of postoesophagectomy conduit function. BJS Open. 2023;7(3):zrad036.
Maes B, Ghoos Y, Hiele M, Rutgeerts P. Gastric emptying rate of solids in patients with nonulcer dyspepsia. Dig Dis Sci. 1997;42(6):1158‐1162.
Gonlachanvit S, Chey WD, Goodman KJ, Parkman HP. Effect of meal size and test duration on gastric emptying and gastric myoelectrical activity as determined with simultaneous [13C] octanoate breath test and electrogastrography in normal subjects using a muffin meal. Dig Dis Sci. 2001;46(12):2643‐2650.
Levanon D, Zhang M, Orr WC, Chen J. Effects of meal volume and composition on gastric myoelectrical activity. Am J Phys. 1998;274(2):G430‐G434.
Gharibans AA, Hayes TC, Carson DA, et al. A novel scalable electrode array and system for non‐invasively assessing gastric function using flexible electronics. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2023;35(2):e14418.
Sebaratnam G, Karulkar N, Calder S, et al. Standardized system and app for continuous patient symptom logging in gastroduodenal disorders: design, implementation, and validation. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2022;34:e14331.
Huang IH, Schol J, Carbone F, et al. Prevalence of delayed gastric emptying in patients with gastroparesis‐like symptoms. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2023;57:773‐782.
Ghoos YF, Maes BD, Geypens BJ, et al. Measurement of gastric emptying rate of solids by means of a carbon‐labeled octanoic acid breath test. Gastroenterology. 1993;104(6):1640‐1647.
Keller J, Hammer HF, Hauser B. 13C‐gastric emptying breath tests: clinical use in adults and children. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2021;33(6):e14172.
Schamberg G, Varghese C, Calder S, et al. Revised spectral metrics for body surface measurements of gastric electrophysiology. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2023;35(3):e14491.
Gharibans AA, Smarr BL, Kunkel DC, Kriegsfeld LJ, Mousa HM, Coleman TP. Artifact rejection methodology enables continuous, noninvasive measurement of gastric myoelectric activity in ambulatory subjects. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):1‐12.
Smout A, Van der Schee E, Grashuis J. What is measured in electrogastrography? Dig Dis Sci. 1980;25(3):179‐187.
O'Grady G, Gharibans AA, Du P, Huizinga JD. The gastric conduction system in health and disease: a translational review. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2021;321(5):G527‐G542.
Chang FY. Electrogastrography: basic knowledge, recording, processing and its clinical applications. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;20(4):502‐516.
Mazzawi T, Bartsch E, Benammi S, et al. Gastric emptying of low‐and high‐caloric liquid meals measured using ultrasonography in healthy volunteers. Ultrasound Int Open. 2019;5(1):E27‐E33.
Camilleri M, Shin A. Novel and validated approaches for gastric emptying scintigraphy in patients with suspected gastroparesis. Dig Dis Sci. 2013;58:1813‐1815.
O'Grady G, Varghese C, Schamberg G, et al. Principles and clinical methods of body surface gastric mapping: technical review. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2023;35:e14556.
Smith AW, Code CF, Schlegel JF. Simultaneous cineradiographic and kymographic studies of human gastric antral motility. J Appl Physiol. 1957;11(1):12‐16.
Carson DA, Bhat S, Hayes TC, et al. Abnormalities on electrogastrography in nausea and vomiting syndromes: a systematic review, meta‐analysis, and comparison to other gastric disorders. Dig Dis Sci. 2022;67(3):773‐785.
Varghese C, Carson DA, Bhat S, et al. Clinical associations of functional dyspepsia with gastric dysrhythmia on electrogastrography: a comprehensive systematic review and meta‐analysis. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2021;33(12):e14151.
Hagopian GG, Johnson KP, Shahsavari D, Parkman HP. Meal eating characteristics of patients with gastroparesis. Dig Dis Sci. 2022;67(8):3872‐3880.
Bhat S, Varghese C, Carson DA, et al. Electrogastrography abnormalities in pediatric gastroduodenal disorders: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2021;73(1):9‐16.
Schol J, Wauters L, Dickman R, et al. United European Gastroenterology (UEG) and European Society for Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) consensus on gastroparesis. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2021;33(8):e14237.

Auteurs

I-Hsuan Huang (IH)

Translational Research Center for Gastrointestinal Disorders, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan.

Stefan Calder (S)

Alimetry Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.
Department of Surgery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Armen A Gharibans (AA)

Alimetry Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.
Department of Surgery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Gabriel Schamberg (G)

Alimetry Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.
Department of Surgery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Chris Varghese (C)

Department of Surgery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Christopher N Andrews (CN)

Alimetry Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.
Division of Gastroenterology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.

Jan Tack (J)

Translational Research Center for Gastrointestinal Disorders, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Greg O'Grady (G)

Alimetry Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.
Department of Surgery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Classifications MeSH