Gastroenterology
Volume 136, Issue 5 , Pages 1526-1543, May 2009

Tests of Gastric Neuromuscular Function

  • Henry P. Parkman

      Affiliations

    • Gastroenterology Section, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests Address requests for reprints to: Henry P. Parkman, MD, Gastroenterology Section, Parkinson Pavilion, 8th Floor, Temple University School of Medicine, 3401 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19140. fax: (215) 707-2684
    • ,
  • Michael P. Jones

      Affiliations

    • Division of Gastroenterology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois

Received 13 June 2008; accepted 11 February 2009. published online 16 March 2009.

John P. Lynch and David Metz, Section Editors

Article Outline

Tests of gastric neuromuscular function are used to evaluate patients with symptoms referable to the upper digestive tract. These symptoms can be associated with alterations in the rates of gastric emptying, impaired accommodation, heightened gastric sensation, or alterations in gastric myoelectrical function and contractility. Management of gastric neuromuscular disorders requires an understanding of pathophysiology and treatment options as well as the appropriate use and interpretation of diagnostic tests. These tests include measures of gastric emptying; contractility; electrical activity; regional gastric motility of the fundus, antrum, and pylorus; and tests of sensation and compliance. Tests are also being developed to improve our understanding of the afferent sensory pathways from the stomach to the central nervous system that mediate gastric sensation in health and gastric disorders. This article reviews tests of gastric function and provides a basic description of the tests, the methodologies behind them, descriptions of the physiology that they assess, and their clinical utility.

Abbreviations used in this paper: EGG, electrogastrography, MRI, magnetic resonance imaging, SPECT, single photon emission computed tomography

 

Podcast interview: www.gastro.org/gastropodcast.

Management of patients with a possible gastric neuromuscular disorder requires an understanding of pathophysiology and treatment options as well as the appropriate use and interpretation of diagnostic tests. Gastric symptoms can be associated with alterations in the rates of gastric emptying, impaired accommodation, heightened gastric sensation, or alterations in gastric myoelectrical function and contractility. This article reviews tests of gastric function and provides a basic description of the tests, the methodologies behind them, descriptions of the physiology that they assess, and their clinical utility. To appropriately address the topic of tests of gastric neuromuscular function, the topics of normal gastric neuromuscular physiology and disorders associated with altered gastric neuromuscular function are initially addressed.

Back to Article Outline

Normal Gastric Neuromuscular Physiology 

Normal gastric physiology is best described in terms of its fasting patterns and the responses of the stomach in response to food intake (the fed response). This description provides an overview of the subsequently described tests of neuromuscular function (see Parkman et al,1 Camilleri et al,2 and Camilleri3 for detailed reviews).

Fasting Gastric Motility 

Fasting gastric contractile patterns are characterized by a cyclic motor phenomenon called the migrating motor complex.2 In healthy people, it occurs approximately once every 90 minutes in the fasting state, most prominently at night. The fasting state generally starts approximately 4 hours after meal ingestion, when the stomach has completely emptied a meal.

The fasting contractile patterns comprise a period of quiescence (phase I), a period of intermittent pressure activity (phase II), and an activity front during which the stomach and small intestine contract at their highest frequency (phase III). During the phase III migrating motor complex, contraction frequencies reach 3 per minute in the stomach and 11 to 12 per minute in the proximal small intestine. This interdigestive contraction wave migrates down the stomach and small intestine and serves to help empty the stomach of indigestible solids and transport them down the small intestine into the colon. These contractile pressures, especially in the fasting period, are generally recorded with antroduodenal manometry.

Gastric Responses to Meal Ingestion 

Gastric accommodation 

Gastric accommodation is a postprandial, vagally mediated reflex resulting in reduced gastric tone primarily in the proximal stomach that occurs with eating a meal (Figure 1).4 Gastric accommodation provides a reservoir for ingested foods in the stomach without a significant increase in intragastric pressure.

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 1. 

    Schematic of a stomach with regional gastric physiology/function. Gastric emptying reflects the coordinated function of the fundus, corpus, antrum, pylorus, and duodenum. Important events for gastric emptying include fundic relaxation and accommodation, antral contractions for trituration, pyloric opening, and overall fundic-antral-pyloric-duodenal coordination. Adapted with permission from Lacy et al.154

The accommodation reflex has 2 principal components. First, receptive relaxation occurs within seconds of eating and is triggered by both oropharyngeal and gastric stimulation. This response involves relaxation of both the lower esophageal sphincter and proximal stomach. Second, adaptive relaxation is a slower process triggered by gastric or duodenal distention and perhaps also modified by specific nutrients.5, 6 The accommodation reflex is vagally mediated and represents the balance between cholinergic excitatory drive and nonadrenergic, noncholinergic inhibitory input. The afferent signal is generated by activation of stretch-sensitive mechanoreceptors in the stomach wall and by activation of osmoreceptors and chemoreceptors in the stomach and duodenum.7 The efferent nonadrenergic, noncholinergic signal involves nitric oxide as the principal neurotransmitter.8, 9 A role for vasoactive intestinal polypeptide has also been suggested.10 Gastric tone is also modulated by sympathetic inputs acting directly through postjunctional α1-adrenoceptors and indirectly on cholinergic nerve terminals mediated by prejunctional α2-adrenoceptors.8, 9, 11

The accommodation reflex is most often recorded using either a gastric barostat or imaging methods such as single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), yet these techniques do not allow discrimination of the active and receptive relaxation phases. Additionally, the roles for various nutritional parameters in modifying accommodation such as meal volume and rate of ingestion, caloric density, and macronutrient content require greater clarification and may have substantial clinical relevance.

Gastric emptying of a meal 

Normal gastric emptying reflects a coordinated effort between the fundus, antrum, pyloric sphincter, and duodenum (Figure 1).1, 2 Coordination of these fundic-antral-pyloric-duodenal motor events is carefully regulated and governed by gastrointestinal electrical activity through the interstitial cells of Cajal and neural connectivity through enteric nerves and vagal efferent nerves from the central nervous system. Feedback from nutrients and volume in the stomach and the small bowel impact on the process of gastric emptying and is conveyed though local enteric sensory nerves, vagal afferent nerves, and hormones.

Fundic and antral smooth muscle contractions are primarily cholinergically mediated. Rhythmic antral contractions, generally at 3 cycles/min, triturate large food particles into an appropriate size for intestinal digestion. The rate of these contractions is governed by the electrical pacemaker of the stomach and the interstitial cells of Cajal.

Pyloric sphincter relaxation, often synchronized with antral contractions, allows smaller food particles and chyme to pass out of the stomach into the duodenum.2 Pyloric relaxation is mediated through release of inhibitory nerves, especially NO and possibly vasoactive intestinal polypeptide.

Solid and liquid food empty from the stomach at different rates.2 Liquids empty from the stomach at an exponential rate because their emptying depends primarily on the gastric-duodenal pressure gradient with less importance on pyloric opening. Solids are initially retained selectively within the stomach until particles have been triturated to a size <2 mm, at which point they can be emptied at a linear rate from the stomach.

Gastric Sensation 

The digestive tract senses ingested meals in various ways. Volume, osmolarity, acidity, and macronutrient composition represent the dominant sensory modalities. Most of this sensory information is acted on solely by the enteric nervous system to facilitate secretion, absorption, and motility through the gut and never reaches the level of consciousness. Some awareness of digestive sensation, such as fullness and satiation, is required to regulate eating behavior.

Ascending pathways 

Visceral sensation is transmitted from the digestive tract to the central nervous system primarily via afferent pathways in the vagus nerve and spinal afferent system. Afferent vagal neurons project mainly to the solitary tract nucleus, with secondary projections ascending to the thalamus and directly to other brain structures involved in arousal, homeostatic, and emotional behaviors.12, 13 These regions include the hypothalamus, locus coeruleus, amygdala, and periaqueductal gray. Third-order neurons project from the thalamus to the sensory cortex.

Primary spinal visceral afferent nerves synapse in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord, with secondary neurons projecting proximally through the spinoreticular, spinomesencephalic, spinohypothalamic, and spinothalamic tracts.14, 15, 16 Spinoreticular inputs activate reflexive responses to visceral sensation without conscious awareness. The spinothalamic tract projects to the ventral posterior lateral, medial dorsal, and ventral medial posterior nuclei of the sensory thalamus, from which tertiary neurons relay digestive sensory signals to the primary somatosensory cortex (S1 and S2), the cingulate cortex, and the insula, respectively.

Gastrointestinal signaling systems are important in regulating eating behavior and metabolic control.17 Ghrelin is an identified hunger-driving hormone originating from the gastrointestinal tract, where it is mainly found in the mucosa of the proximal stomach. Neuropeptides in the brain, which influence food intake, are regulated by peptide signaling from the gut. Effects may take place directly through action of gut peptide in the brain or through neural signaling from the periphery to the brain; neuropeptide Y, agouti gene-related peptide, and orexins are stimulatory, while melanocortins and α-melanocortin–stimulating hormone are inhibitory. Satiety signals from the gastrointestinal tract act through the arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus and the solitary tract nucleus of the brain stem, where neuronal networks directly linked to hypothalamic centers for food intake and eating behavior are activated. Gut hormone and neurotransmitters influencing satiation include cholecystokinin, glucagon-like peptide 1, and peptide YY.

The brain stem sensory apparatus, vomiting center, and area postrema are also relevant for the sensations of nausea and vomiting. Abdominal vagal afferents that detect intestinal luminal contents and gastric tone terminate in the nucleus tractus solitarius. Neurons from the nucleus tractus solitarius project to a central pattern generator, which coordinates the sequence of behaviors during emesis, as well as directly to diverse populations of neurons in the ventral medulla and hypothalamus (“vomiting center”).18

Cortical structures involved in sensory processing 

The cingulate cortex is referred to as the medial pain system and is mainly involved in the affective and motivational dimension of somatic and visceral stimuli.16 The anterior cingulate cortex functions primarily to integrate visceral, attentional, and emotional information and to regulate affect.19 The prefrontal cortex is involved in affective processing and in selecting and generating responses to this sensory input.20 The somatosensory cortex (S1/S2) is also referred to as the lateral pain system and functions to encode intensity and localization of somatic and visceral stimuli. The insular cortex is involved in encoding sensory and affective dimensions of pain and integrates visceral and somatic sensory input with emotional information.21 Signals from the insular cortex to the amygdala, hypothalamus, periaqueductal gray, and other limbic and brain stem regions provide cortical regulation of autonomic visceromotor responses.21

Descending pathways 

According to the gate control theory, the brain modulates afferent pain signals by dispersing inhibitory signals to the spinal cord.22 The perigenual anterior cingulate cortex sends inhibitory efferent signals directly and indirectly that travel by way of the opioidergic, serotoninergic, and noradrenergic systems to the dorsal horn of the spinal cord, where they presynaptically inhibit the afferent pain signals.23 Because brain regions involved in descending pain inhibition are also implicated in the processing of visceral, attentional, and emotional information, the dispersal of inhibitory efferent messages by these structures may be mediated by cognitive, emotional, and behavioral factors.

Psychological factors and visceral sensation 

Almost all of the brain regions involved in the processing and integration of visceral sensory information are part of a larger central neural network known as the limbic system, which is heavily involved in the identification, generation, and regulation of emotion.24, 25 It is also involved in the “top-down” modulation of visceral pain transmission as well as visceral perception.

Experimentally induced anxiety in healthy subjects is associated with increased epigastric symptom scores during a standard nutrient drink test and is also associated with decreased gastric compliance and accommodation to a test meal in healthy volunteers.26 Similarly, state anxiety in hypersensitive patients with functional dyspepsia is significantly and negatively correlated with discomfort threshold, pain threshold, and gastric compliance.27 Finally, functional neuroimaging studies combined with behavioral conditioning paradigms have shown that both actual and anticipated visceral pain activate the visceral pain matrix.28 These representative studies show the importance of affective and cognitive processes in modifying digestive sensations.

Back to Article Outline

Disorders Associated With Altered Gastric Motility and Function 

Gastroparesis 

Gastroparesis is a symptomatic chronic disorder of the stomach characterized by delayed gastric emptying in the absence of mechanical obstruction. Symptoms of gastroparesis are variable and include early satiety, postprandial fullness, nausea, vomiting, abdominal distention, and upper abdominal discomfort.29 Delayed gastric emptying is also common in functional dyspepsia, occurring in approximately 25%–40% of patients.30, 31

The correlation between symptoms and delayed gastric emptying is variable.32, 33, 34 Postprandial fullness, nausea, and vomiting have been reported to predict delayed emptying in patients with functional dyspepsia.30, 31 In patients with diabetes, abdominal fullness and bloating were found to predict delayed gastric emptying.35 In some drug trials of prokinetic agents, symptom improvement correlated with acceleration of gastric emptying36, 37; however, in other studies, this relationship has not been shown.38, 39 In individuals with symptoms of gastroparesis who have normal rates of gastric emptying, other motor, myoelectric, or sensory abnormalities may elicit symptoms.1

Gastroparesis occurs in many clinical settings; idiopathic, diabetic, and postsurgical etiologies comprise the majority of cases in most series (Table 1). In one series of 146 patients, gastroparesis was idiopathic in 36%, diabetic in 29%, and postsurgical in 13% of patients.40 Several gastrointestinal and systemic diseases are associated with gastroparesis.

Table 1. Etiology of Gastroparesis (Nonobstructive Delayed Gastric Emptying)
Idiopathic
Diabetes mellitus
Postsurgical
Partial gastric resection/vagotomy
Postbariatric surgery
Nissen fundoplication
Transplantation: lung, heart-lung
Gastrointestinal disorders associated with delayed gastric emptying
Diffuse gastrointestinal motor disorders (eg, chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction)
Gastroesophageal reflux disease
Achalasia
Gastric ulcer
Atrophic gastritis
Functional dyspepsia
Hypertrophic pyloric stenosis
Celiac disease
Nongastrointestinal disorders associated with delayed gastric emptying
Eating disorders: anorexia
Neurologic disorders
Central nervous system tumors
Parkinson's disease
Collagen vascular disorders
Scleroderma
Systemic lupus erythematosus
Amyloidosis
Endocrine and metabolic disorders
Thyroid dysfunction
Parathyroid dysfunction
Chronic renal insufficiency
Gastric infection
Chronic mesenteric ischemia
Tumor associated (paraneoplastic)
Medication associated

Delayed gastric emptying of solids after gastric surgery or vagal nerve injury is common, with patients most commonly experiencing vomiting, weight loss, and bezoar formation. The incidence of postsurgical gastroparesis varies from 5% to 25%.41 The dominant mechanism appears to be vagal injury, with resultant loss of both fundal tone and antral peristalsis.41

Systemic Disorders Associated With Altered Gastric Physiology and Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms 

Diabetes mellitus 

Gastroparesis is a recognized complication of diabetes mellitus and is classically considered to occur in those individuals with long-standing type 1 diabetes mellitus and other associated complications such as retinopathy, nephropathy, and peripheral neuropathy. Many affected patients have associated findings of dysautonomia, including postural hypotension. Longitudinal studies, primarily from academic centers, suggest that delayed gastric emptying is present in 25%–55% of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.42, 43 Community studies suggest the prevalence of gastroparesis is lower, because only about 15% of diabetic patients have symptoms of gastroparesis. Gastroparesis has also been described in approximately 30% of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.32 However, highly variable rates of gastric emptying, including acceleration of transit, have been reported in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus, suggesting that development of gastroparesis is not universal or inevitable.43, 44, 45 Some individuals with rapid emptying have diabetes of relatively short duration. In those with accelerated emptying, impairment of fundic receptive relaxation to meal ingestion may be present.46

Clinical consequences of diabetic gastroparesis include gastrointestinal symptoms, alteration in drug absorption from delayed emptying of medications from the stomach, and poor glycemic control.42 Symptoms include nausea, vomiting, early satiety, fullness, and abdominal discomfort. The presence of abdominal bloating and fullness particularly seems to be associated with the magnitude of emptying delay.35 Symptom severity, however, does not necessarily correlate well with the degree of gastric stasis.32, 47 Some patients with severe symptoms may have near-normal to normal emptying. In these individuals, other abnormalities, including impaired fundic relaxation, gastric slow wave dysrhythmias, or visceral hypersensitivity, may be potentially responsible for dyspeptic symptoms.32 “Diabetic gastropathy” is commonly used because symptoms may not predict delays in gastric emptying and responses to prokinetic treatment may not be consequences of accelerated emptying.

Changes in gastric emptying may affect postprandial blood glucose concentrations because of unpredictable delivery of food into the duodenum.48 Conversely, poor glycemic control may adversely affect gastric function and be associated with symptoms such as nausea and vomiting. Long-term oral administration of prokinetic agents has had mixed results in decreasing plasma glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin levels in diabetic patients.49, 50, 51

Diabetic gastroparesis is likely to result from impaired neural control of gastric motility, possibly at the level of the vagus nerve or enteric nervous system.29 Other factors, including impairment of the inhibitory NO-containing nerves,52 damage of the pacemaker interstitial cells of Cajal,53 and underlying smooth muscle dysfunction, have been described in animal models and patients with diabetic gastroparesis.54, 55

Hyperglycemia alone also may reversibly impair vagal efferent function as well as gastric and pyloric motility and reduce the effectiveness of prokinetic agents.56 Hyperglycemia decreases antral contractility, decreases antral phase III of the migrating motor complex, increases pyloric contractions, causes gastric dysrhythmias (primarily tachygastria), delays gastric emptying, and even modulates fundic relaxation properties.57, 58 Normalization of serum glucose levels in hyperglycemic patients has been shown to stabilize gastric myoelectric activity, improve gastric emptying, and restore antral phase III activity.56

Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus also appear to have sensory dysfunction and exhibit increased perception of gastric distention, with exaggerated nausea, fullness, and epigastric pain for a given distending stimulus.58 In addition to its effects on motor function, hyperglycemia increases nausea and fullness during proximal gastric distention.46, 59 Increased sensitivity of the proximal stomach may be responsible for postprandial dyspeptic symptoms when the stomach is distended by a meal.58, 59

Generalized disorders of gastrointestinal motility 

Gastroparesis may occur as a component of a definable generalized gut dysmotility syndrome. Chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction is a syndrome with recurrent symptoms suggestive of intestinal obstruction in the absence of mechanical blockage. Radiologic findings of chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction include luminal dilation with air-fluid levels throughout the small intestine. Chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction can be caused by a variety of systemic diseases, including scleroderma, amyloidosis, myxedema, long-standing diabetes mellitus, and paraneoplastic complications most commonly seen with small cell lung carcinoma. However, many cases are idiopathic in nature. The 2 main forms of chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction are myopathic and neuropathic. Antroduodenal manometry may assist in differentiating these 2 forms.2 In intestinal myopathy, low-amplitude contractions that propagate normally are seen. In intestinal neuropathy, contractions are normal in amplitude but disorganized in morphology, including disruption of phase III activity, bursts of nonpropagating activity during fasting, and failure to convert from the fasting to the postprandial fed motor pattern.

Dumping Syndrome and Rapid Gastric Emptying 

Dumping syndrome is characterized by rapid gastric emptying accompanied by gastrointestinal and vasomotor symptoms. It occurs mainly after partial or complete gastrectomy, vagotomy (often postsurgical but occasionally due to diabetes or dysautonomia), fundoplication, or bariatric surgery.60, 61 Symptoms result from rapid gastric emptying and are characterized as early and late dumping. Early dumping begins shortly after meal ingestion and is characterized by symptoms of epigastric fullness, crampy abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, sweating, weakness, dizziness, pallor, palpitations, and tachycardia. Late dumping typically begins 90–240 minutes after a carbohydrate-rich meal and includes symptoms of diaphoresis, tremulousness, tachycardia, light-headedness, weakness, and confusion.

Symptoms of early dumping are explained in part by the rapid passage of hyperosmolar contents into the small bowel, accompanied by a shift of fluids from the intravascular compartment to the lumen.62 This induces intestinal distention and accompanying symptoms. The vasomotor symptoms are due to enhanced release of gastrointestinal hormones, resulting in splanchnic vasodilation and vascular pooling along with accompanying fluid shifts. Late dumping is attributed largely to reactive hypoglycemia following transient dumping-induced hyperglycemia with reactive insulin secretion. Because the effects of insulin typically persist beyond the transient initial hyperglycemia, reactive glycemia occurs when all sugars have been absorbed.

Dumping syndrome is diagnosed based on clinical symptoms in a patient with predisposing conditions. Gastric emptying studies can demonstrate rapid gastric emptying.63 However, the yield of gastric emptying for diagnosis of dumping is probably low. Gastric emptying of liquids focusing on the early phases of emptying may be particularly helpful because gastric emptying of solids is more variably affected. The diagnosis is confirmed by demonstrating hypoglycemia in association with postprandial symptoms.

Rapid gastric emptying of solids has been shown in some patients with functional dyspepsia64, 65 and has also been reported in diabetes, particularly early in the course of type 2 diabetes mellitus.66 Many of these patients have symptoms indistinguishable from those of gastroparesis. Rapid emptying has been recently observed as an accompanying factor in adult patients with cyclic vomiting syndrome.67, 68

Functional Gastroduodenal Disorders 

According to Rome III criteria, functional dyspepsia is defined as symptoms of bothersome postprandial fullness, early satiation, epigastric pain, and/or epigastric burning with no evidence of structural disease.69 It has been suggested to categorize patients with functional dyspepsia as having pain-predominant symptoms (epigastric pain syndrome) or symptoms related to the ingestion of a meal such as early satiation and postprandial fullness (postprandial distress syndrome).

There are associations of various dyspeptic symptoms with alterations in gastric emptying, accommodation, and sensitivity (Table 2); these associations are modest and inconsistent.8, 69, 70, 71 Nevertheless, there is evidence that gastrointestinal motility and sensation are disturbed in at least a subset of patients with functional dyspepsia. Delayed gastric emptying is reported in between 20% and 50% of patients with functional dyspepsia, and a meta-analysis of 17 studies showed significantly delayed solid-phase gastric emptying in 40% of patients with functional dyspepsia.72 Several large studies have shown that patients with delayed gastric emptying for solids are more likely to report postprandial fullness, nausea, and vomiting,30, 31 but these associations are not consistently confirmed.70, 73, 74 Interestingly, in a series reported by Delgado-Aros et al, 17 of 39 patients (43%) with functional dyspepsia had initial rapid gastric emptying at 1 hour, whereas 16 of 39 patients (41%) had delayed overall gastric emptying at 4 hours.65 Symptoms did not differentiate those with delayed versus rapid gastric emptying.

Table 2. Relationship of Gastric Pathophysiological Alterations and Symptoms
PathophysiologyAssociated symptoms
Delayed gastric emptyingVomiting
Postprandial fullness
Delayed proximal gastric emptyingHeartburn
Regurgitation
Impaired proximal gastric accommodationEarly satiety
Weight loss
HypersensitivityPain
Belching
Weight loss
Gastric dysrhythmiasNausea
Abdominal pain

There is some overlap between gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia because the symptoms and gastric emptying test results may meet definitions for both in a subset of patients.29, 69 As a consequence, some patients with mild abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and evidence of delayed emptying are considered to have functional dyspepsia by some clinicians and gastroparesis by others. In the authors' opinion, patients with marked delay in gastric emptying should be diagnosed with gastroparesis, not functional dyspepsia. In general, predominant abdominal pain with lesser degrees of nausea is more consistent with a diagnosis of functional dyspepsia, whereas predominant nausea and vomiting with lesser degrees of abdominal pain is more characteristic of gastroparesis.

Using either a gastric barostat or SPECT, impaired accommodation of the proximal stomach has been reported in up to 40% of patients with functional dyspepsia.75, 76 While associations have been reported between impaired gastric accommodation and symptoms of early satiety (Table 2), these are not consistently confirmed.8, 77 Similarly, an association between hypersensitivity to gastric distention and symptoms of pain, belching, and weight loss have been reported.77, 78 Again, while heightened sensitivity to gastric distention is commonly observed, symptom associations are not consistently shown.8, 78 Additionally, it has been shown that state anxiety is significantly and negatively correlated with discomfort threshold, pain threshold, and compliance.27 This observation highlights the complex relationships between pain reporting and factors such as psychiatric distress and somatization.

Cyclic vomiting syndrome 

Cyclic vomiting syndrome was first described in children but is now recognized to affect patients at any age. There is a typical vomiting pattern consisting of recurrent episodes of severe nausea and vomiting lasting hours or days, separated by symptom-free intervals.79 The syndrome is considered to be a manifestation of migraine diathesis.80 Prodromal symptoms often include nausea, lethargy, anorexia, and pallor, but migraine-like aura is rare. The nausea and vomiting is severe and can often be completely incapacitating. In adults, the average frequency of vomiting and retching is 8.5 times per hour, with a range of 0.5 to 20 times per hour.79 The emetic phase can last anywhere from 12 hours to 1 week.

Disturbances in gastric motility have been reported in cyclic vomiting syndrome, although no consistent disturbance is seen. Gastric and intestinal hypomotility have been identified in a subgroup of patients between vomiting episodes.81, 82 Recently, several investigators have reported gastric emptying to be accelerated when these patients are feeling well.82

Central disorders associated with altered gastric physiology 

Anxiety and depression 

In healthy human subjects, anger, fear, pain, anxiety, and intense exercise result in reduced gastric motility.83 These stress-induced alterations can be acutely mimicked and may be mediated through the actions of corticotrophin-releasing hormone. There is also evidence that mood disorders and personality factors may influence gastric function through decreased vagal activity.84 The presence of significant anxiety has also been associated with prolonged antral meal retention times in patients with functional dyspepsia.85

Eating disorders and rumination 

Patients with both anorexia and bulimia nervosa often report symptoms of nausea, vomiting, early satiation, excessive fullness, bloating, and constipation.86 Patients with anorexia nervosa often have delayed gastric emptying, decreased antral contractility, and disturbances of gastric myoelectrical activity and increased intestinal transit times.86, 87, 88, 89 Patients with bulimia have been shown to have prolonged gastric emptying times, increased gastric capacity and gastric dilation, impaired gastric accommodation, and impaired postprandial cholecystokinin release.90, 91, 92 While available literature is scant, it appears that gastric emptying returns to normal with restoration of nutrition, body weight, and successful treatment of the eating disorder.93

Rumination syndrome is a chronic functional gastroduodenal disorder that is often confused with either bulimia nervosa or gastroparesis.94 Patients with rumination report the effortless regurgitation of recently ingested food into the mouth, followed by either rechewing and reswallowing or expulsion of the regurgitate.69 While most commonly seen in children and developmentally disabled adults, it can occur in both males and females of all ages and cognitive abilities. Rumination is distinguished from bulimia nervosa by the absence of disordered eating behaviors and from gastroparesis due to the lack of nausea or vomiting.95 However, the large series from the Mayo Clinic showed that some patients with rumination syndrome had previously had bulimia nervosa, and therefore the differentiation of bulimia is not always based on disordered eating behaviors.96 The classic history of effortless regurgitation “food in, food out, day in, day out” behavior can be helpful in diagnosing rumination syndrome clinically.96 Additionally, tests of gastric function are most often normal in patients with rumination.95 The diagnosis can be confirmed with antroduodenal manometry with the demonstration of simultaneous contractions (R waves) on the manometry probes throughout the gastrointestinal tract.96 Working with a behavioral psychologist is important for proper management of these patients because the only proven therapy is behavioral.

Back to Article Outline

Tests of Gastric Neuromuscular Function 

Gastric Emptying Tests 

Gastric emptying scintigraphy 

Scintigraphic determination of the emptying rate of a solid meal from the stomach is regarded as the standard measurement technique for gastric emptying (Table 3, Table 4). Determination of emptying rates of liquid meals is less sensitive and generally reserved for the evaluation of dumping syndrome and postgastric surgical disorders. The usefulness of gastric scintigraphy in directing therapy and predicting response, however, has been debated.38, 97

Table 3. Disorders With Abnormalities in Gastric Physiology/Function
Delayed gastric emptying
Gastroparesis
Chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction
Functional dyspepsia
Rapid gastric emptying
Dumping syndrome
Cyclic vomiting syndrome
Postfundoplication
Functional dyspepsia
Disorders with sensory abnormalities
Functional dyspepsia
Table 4. Tests of Gastric Motility and Function
Gastric emptying
Barium
Radiopaque markers
Scintigraphy
Breath tests (13C-octanoic acid)
Ultrasonography
MRI
Applied potential tomography/epigastric impedance
Wireless capsule motility (SmartPill pH/pressure capsule)
Contractile pressures
Antroduodenal manometry
Dynamic antral scintigraphy
Gastric barostat
Gastric myoelectric activity
EGG
Biomagnetic field recording - SQUID
Accommodation
Gastric barostat
Gastric mucosal labeling with SPECT imaging
Satiety
Water loading
Nutrient loading

For solid-phase testing, most centers use a 99mTc sulfur colloid–labeled egg sandwich as a test meal1 (Figure 2). A recent consensus statement from the American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society and the Society of Nuclear Medicine recommends a standardized method for measuring gastric emptying by scintigraphy.98 A low-fat egg white meal (Eggbeaters egg whites; ConAgra Foods, Inc, Downers, IL) with imaging at 0, 1, 2, and 4 hours after meal ingestion, as described by a published multicenter protocol,99 provides standardized information about normal, delayed, and rapid gastric emptying and is currently the best way to conduct a scintigraphic gastric emptying test. Extending scintigraphy to 4 hours is advocated to improve the accuracy in determining the presence of delayed gastric emptying.100, 101 Adoption of this standardized protocol will resolve the lack of uniformity of testing, add reliability and credibility to the results, and improve the clinical utility of the gastric emptying test.98 This test meal has a low fat content and theoretically might produce different results than conventional meals. Imaging periods of ≤2 hours have been shown to have significant day-to-day variability (up to 20%) in rates of gastric emptying, which increase as the postprandial imaging period decreases.102

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 2. 

    Gastric emptying scintigraphy. After ingestion of a radioactive egg sandwich meal, images are obtained immediately after eating (T = 0) and at 1, 2, 3, and 4 hours postprandially (upper panel). The percent remaining in the stomach is depicted over time (lower panel).

Emptying of solids typically exhibits a lag phase followed by a prolonged linear emptying phase. A variety of parameters can be calculated from the emptying profile of a radiolabeled meal. The simplest approach for interpreting a gastric emptying study is to report the percent retention at defined times after meal ingestion (usually 2 and 4 hours). The half-emptying time also may be calculated; however, extrapolation of the emptying curve from an individual who did not empty 50% of the ingested meal during the actual imaging time may provide a markedly inaccurate determination of the half-emptying time.2

Patients should discontinue medications that may affect gastric emptying for an adequate period before this test based on drug half-life. Generally, this is for 3 days before the test. The drugs to be primarily concerned about include narcotic opioid analgesics as well as anticholinergic agents that can delay gastric emptying and prokinetic agents that can accelerate gastric emptying. Other agents may also impact on gastric emptying, including those used to treat diabetes, such as pramlintide (an amylin-like compound) and exenatide (a GPL-1 receptor agonist). Serotonin receptor antagonists such as ondansetron, which have little effect on gastric emptying, may be given for severe symptoms before performance of gastric scintigraphy. Hyperglycemia (glucose level >270 mg/dL) delays gastric emptying in diabetic patients.56 Deferring gastric emptying testing until relative euglycemia is achieved is reasonable to obtain a reliable determination of emptying parameters in the absence of acute metabolic derangement. Premenopausal women have slower gastric emptying than men,103, 104 so some advocate using separate reference values for premenopausal women.30

Regional gastric emptying can assess intragastric meal distribution and transit from the proximal to distal portions of the stomach and may provide greater information regarding fundal and antral function (Figure 3). The routine gastric emptying imaging can be used to measure both regional and total gastric emptying. Visual inspection of fundal and antral gastric emptying and quantification of regional emptying with fundic and antral regions of interest can be helpful for defining abnormal physiology and explaining dyspeptic symptoms, especially when global gastric emptying values are normal.105, 106, 107, 108 Studies have shown an association between symptoms of nausea, early satiety, abdominal distention, and acid reflux with proximal gastric retention, whereas vomiting is associated more with delayed distal gastric emptying.106

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 3. 

    Regional gastric emptying with delayed distal gastric emptying in functional dyspepsia. The figure demonstrates selective retention in the distal stomach, notably seen at 240 minutes after meal ingestion.

Wireless capsule motility for assessment of gastric emptying 

The SmartPill pH/pressure capsule is an ingestible capsule that measures pH, pressure, and temperature using miniaturized wireless sensor technology as the capsule travels through the digestive tract. Gastric emptying of the SmartPill is identified by the abrupt acidic pH profile of the stomach to the alkaline pH of the duodenum (Figure 4). In addition, pressure profiles provide motility indices for the stomach, small intestine, and colon. The SmartPill GI Monitoring System has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the assessment of gastric pH, gastric emptying, and total gastrointestinal transit time. Gastric emptying as measured by the SmartPill is closely correlated with the T-90% for gastric emptying109 and appears to empty with the phase III migrating motor complex, signifying completion of the postprandial phase and return to the fasting condition.110 In validation studies conducted with simultaneous gastric emptying scintigraphy in healthy subjects and patients with symptoms of gastroparesis, the gastric emptying time of the wireless pH and pressure capsule was significantly correlated (r = 0.73) with scintigraphic gastric emptying.109 Using a 5-hour cutoff for gastric emptying, the capsule discriminated between normal or delayed gastric emptying with a sensitivity of 0.87 and a specificity of 0.92. In addition to measuring gastric emptying, this nondigestible pH and pressure capsule can measure small bowel transit and colonic transit.111

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 4. 

    Capsule assessment of gastric emptying using a pH/pressure-sensing capsule. After capsule ingestion at time 0, the pH tracing (red line) decreases to a pH of about 1.4. This is followed by an increase in pH representing the buffering of the gastric acid by a meal, followed by a decline of the gastric pH to about 1. At 2¾ hours after capsule ingestion, there is an abrupt increase in pH from 1 to 6 representing the expulsion of the capsule from the acidic stomach to the alkaline duodenum. This gastric emptying of the capsule is preceded by high-amplitude contractions (blue line).

Breath testing for gastric emptying 

Stable isotope breath tests for gastric emptying represent a promising way to evaluate gastric emptying noninvasively and without radiation exposure. Breath tests using the nonradioactive isotope 13C bound to a digestible substance have been validated for measuring gastric emptying. Most commonly, 13C-labeled octanoate, a medium-chain triglyceride, is bound into a solid meal such as a muffin.112, 113, 114 Other studies have bound 13C to acetate or proteinaceous algae (Spirulina platensis).115 After ingestion and stomach emptying, 13C-octanoate is absorbed in the small intestine and metabolized to 13CO2, which is then expelled from the lungs during respiration (Figure 5). The rate-limiting step is the rate of solid gastric emptying. Thus, 13C breath testing provides a measure of solid-phase emptying. The 13C breath test provides reproducible results that correlate with findings on gastric emptying scintigraphy.112, 113, 114 Because these tests do not involve radiation exposure, they can be used in the clinic or at the bedside. Breath samples can be preserved and shipped to a laboratory for analysis. Stable isotope breath testing is currently used mainly in a research setting. Validation of this test in patients with emphysema, cirrhosis, celiac sprue, and pancreatic insufficiency is needed, because rates of substrate digestion and excretion may be impaired in these disorders. Although widely used in Europe, presently this test is not approved for routine clinical practice in the United States. The current lack of a commercially available standard meal prevents widespread adoption of this technology for clinical use. Promising validation studies have been performed with a shelf-stable product consisting of a freeze-dried egg mix labeled with 13C platensis, saltine crackers, and meal.115 This meal was simultaneously evaluated with scintigraphy in 38 normal subjects and 129 patients with gastroparetic symptoms. Individual breath samples were collected at 45, 150, and 180 minutes after meal ingestion with 89% sensitivity for identifying delayed gastric emptying and 93% sensitivity for identifying accelerated gastric emptying.

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 5. 

    13C-Octanoate breath test for gastric emptying. Sequential breath samples every 15 minutes are obtained after ingestion of a 13C-octanoate containing meal. These are analyzed for the fractional excretion of 13C and can be expressed as the fraction remaining or the percent dose per hour (A). B illustrates the good correlation between breath testing and scintigraphy in assessing gastric emptying when tests are performed simultaneously. Reprinted with permission from Chey et al.155

Ultrasonography 

Transabdominal ultrasonography measures several parameters of gastric motor function, including emptying, gastroduodenal flow, contractility, and accommodation.116 Serial changes in antral cross-sectional area can provide an index of gastric emptying. Duplex sonography can quantify transpyloric flow of liquid gastric contents. Ultrasonography also has been used to measure accommodation in the proximal stomach. Ultrasound determinations of gastric emptying are operator dependent and have proven reliable only for measurements of liquid emptying rates. Testing may be difficult in obese individuals. Ultrasonography is most commonly used only in research settings. Recent studies suggest that 3-dimensional ultrasonography may allow a precise measure of gastric emptying, given the capacity for accurate volume calculations of the stomach.117

MRI 

MRI can measure gastric emptying and gastric volume, an index of gastric accommodation. In this test, transaxial abdominal scans are generally obtained in the supine position every 15 minutes before and after a predominately liquid meal, applying a spin-echo technique with T1-weighted images.116 MRI can differentiate between gastric meal volume and total gastric volume, allowing determination of gastric secretory rates. This noninvasive test is appealing because MRI can be used to measure gastric emptying, volume, and wall motion without radiation exposure. In addition, MRI has the ability to separately assess the emptying of fat and water from the stomach. Recent studies suggest that postprandial gastric expansion is accompanied by increased gastric air.118 Further studies are needed to understand the contribution of gastric relaxation and swallowed air to postprandial volume changes. The specialized equipment, time needed for interpretation, and expense have limited the role of MRI in assessing gastric motility to use in clinical research. The supine position of the patient for imaging is also a potential limitation because this is not the normal position postprandially. Studies suggest that body position does not affect gastric relaxation and initial postprandial gastric volumes; however, meal emptying is slower in the supine position than when sitting.119

Gastric Contractile Activity 

Antroduodenal manometry 

Antroduodenal manometry provides information regarding the amplitude and patterns of gastric and duodenal contractions in both fasting and postprandial periods.2, 120 Antroduodenal manometry is performed in stationary settings over a 5- to 8-hour period or in ambulatory fashion over 24 hours using solid-state transducers. Ambulatory studies allow up to 24-hour recordings with better assessment of the migrating motor complex cycle during the night period and provide the advantage of correlating symptoms with abnormal motor patterns. However, catheter migration in ambulatory studies may limit interpretation of antral motility. The proposed indications for gastroduodenojejunal manometry include (1) clarification of the diagnosis in patients with unexplained nausea, vomiting, or symptoms suggestive of upper gastrointestinal dysmotility, (2) differentiation between neuropathic and myopathic gastric or small bowel dysfunction, (3) identification of generalized dysmotility in patients with colonic dysmotility (eg, chronic constipation), particularly before subtotal colectomy, (4) confirmation of the diagnosis in suspected chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction syndromes when the diagnosis is unclear on clinical or radiologic grounds, (5) assessment for possible mechanical obstruction when clinical features suggest, but radiologic studies do not reveal, obstruction, and (6) confirmation of a diagnosis of rumination syndrome.2, 111

In gastroparesis, antroduodenal manometry may exhibit a decrease in the frequency or amplitude of antral contractions and phase III contractions may originate in the duodenum rather than antrum. In some individuals, increased tonic and phasic activity of the pylorus (“pylorospasm”) or irregular bursts of small intestinal contractions may be observed.121 The prevalence of concomitant small intestinal motor dysfunction in patients with gastroparesis ranges from 17% to 85% in different studies.122, 123 Antroduodenal manometry can help confirm or exclude an underlying dysmotility syndrome when results of gastric emptying testing are normal or borderline. With an accurate stationary recording, a reduced postprandial distal antral motility index correlates with delayed gastric emptying of solids.124 Normal findings on manometry coupled with a normal transit test result suggest that antral motor dysfunction is not the cause of symptoms.2

Antroduodenal manometry may differentiate between small intestinal neuropathic and myopathic disease and may suggest unsuspected small bowel obstruction or a rumination syndrome.2, 125 Myopathic disorders, such as scleroderma or amyloidosis, produce contractile activity of abnormally low amplitude, whereas neuropathic conditions are characterized by contractions of normal amplitude with abnormal propagation, including loss of intestinal phase III, random bursts, and failure of conversion to the fed pattern after meal ingestion. Occult mechanical obstruction of the small intestine may be suggested by 2 patterns of small bowel motor abnormalities: (1) postprandial clustered contractions for >30 minutes' duration separated by quiescence or (2) simultaneous prolonged (>8 seconds) or summated contractions suggesting a common cavity phenomenon from a dilated segment of intestine.126 In some patients with rumination syndrome, antroduodenal manometry may demonstrate a characteristic pattern of simultaneous contractions in all recording sites (R waves) secondary to increases in intra-abdominal pressures from somatic muscle activity, especially during the postprandial period.96

Some investigators perform antroduodenal manometry with infusions of erythromycin and/or octreotide to predict the patient's clinical response to long-term treatment with these agents.127 Other studies have suggested that findings of antroduodenal manometry may influence treatment decisions in small numbers of patients (∼20%) with dysmotility syndromes.128 In pediatric studies, the absence of migrating motor complexes predicts a poor response to prokinetic agents.129 However, validation of manometry as a critical diagnostic test for managing patients with suspected gastric or small intestinal dysmotility is incomplete.

Gastric Myoelectric Activity 

Electrogastrography 

Electrogastrography (EGG) records gastric myoelectrical activity, known as the slow wave, using cutaneous electrodes affixed to the anterior abdomen overlying the stomach (Figure 6).130 The slow wave is responsible for controlling the maximal frequency and the controlled aboral propagation of distal gastric contractions. Meal ingestion increases the amplitude of the EGG signal, which is believed to result either from increased antral contractility or from mechanical distention of the stomach, which moves it in closer proximity to the recording electrodes. EGG testing quantifies the dominant frequency and regularity of gastric myoelectrical activity, the percentage of time in which abnormal slow wave rhythms are present during fasting and postprandially, and assesses the increase in amplitude (or power) after a meal.2 In general, an abnormal EGG is defined when the percent time in dysrhythmias exceeds 30% of the recording time and/or when meal ingestion fails to elicit an increase in signal amplitude.131

Gastric dysrhythmias (tachygastria, bradygastria) and decreased EGG amplitude responses to meal ingestion have been characterized in patients with idiopathic and diabetic gastroparesis, idiopathic nausea and vomiting, motion sickness, and nausea and vomiting of pregnancy.2, 131 EGG abnormalities are present in 75% of patients with gastroparesis versus 25% of symptomatic patients with normal gastric emptying.131 Hyperglycemia may provoke dysrhythmias in diabetic patients.57

Some investigators suggest that EGG abnormalities and delayed gastric emptying may define slightly different patient populations with dyspeptic symptoms.131 Symptomatic responses to antiemetic or prokinetic drug treatments have been associated with resolution of gastric dysrhythmias.33 Unfortunately, patterns of EGG abnormalities do not guide prokinetic therapy.

Some clinical investigators consider EGG an adjunct to gastric emptying scintigraphy as part of a comprehensive evaluation of patients with refractory symptoms suggestive of an upper gastrointestinal motility disorder.2, 131 The EGG may be helpful in identifying patients with a gastric myoelectrical disorder in those patients with a normal gastric emptying test result. However, to date, there has been little investigation to validate the utility of EGG in the management of patients with suspected gastric dysmotility.

Gastric Accommodation and Sensation 

Gastric barostat 

The gastric barostat is a well-established method for measuring gastric accommodation and sensation. It is regarded as the gold standard to which other methods are compared and validated.132 This is an invasive technique requiring the oral introduction of a balloon into the gastric fundus. The balloon is highly compliant up to a maximum volume of 1.0–1.2 L and is attached to a barostat machine, which allows isobaric or isovolumic expansion of the balloon with continual monitoring of intraballoon volume or pressure. In this way, the accommodation response of the gastric fundus or antrum to various interventions can be recorded. However, because the technique is invasive, uncomfortable, and requires considerable expertise, it is used primarily in only a few centers almost exclusively in a research application. Gastric volumes can be measured by maintaining a constant pressure in the balloon and noting changes in balloon volume that correspond to changes in gastric volume. Gastric sensation can also be assessed by using protocols that vary the intraballoon pressure in either progressive or random fashions.133

While not a universal finding, most studies have reported that impaired accommodation is present in a high proportion of patients with functional dyspepsia and that this is associated with symptoms of bloating, distention, nausea, early satiation, and weight loss.78, 134, 135 In patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, acute hyperglycemia increases proximal gastric compliance and this may contribute to the delay in gastric emptying associated with hyperglycemia.136 Also in type 1 diabetes mellitus, barostat testing has shown impaired accommodation related to autonomic neuropathy.137, 138 Similar findings have been reported in patients with systemic sclerosis.139 Approximately one third of patients with functional dyspepsia have heightened sensitivity to distention of the proximal stomach, and this finding is associated with symptoms of postprandial pain, belching, and weight loss.77 Not all investigators have confirmed these associations.8, 140

Gastric barostat remains the standard method for assessing gastric sensation to distention, compliance, and meal-induced accommodation. It is well suited for studies investigating the impact of various therapeutic interventions on gastric function and sensation. The major disadvantage of this technique is its invasiveness and complexity of operation. Additionally, it is possible that the presence of the gastric balloon may influence the gastric response to the test meal used to induce accommodation. During the study, air leaks can hinder interpretation in a small percentage of studies and occasionally low volumes used in the test can hamper interpretation of the accommodation response.141 At present, gastric barostat remains an important investigational device that has not crossed over into the realm of clinical applicability.

SPECT 

99mTc-pertechnetate administered intravenously is taken up from the circulation and excreted by parietal and mucous cells in the gastrointestinal tract. While this property has been used in the identification of ectopic gastric tissue as seen with Meckel's diverticulum, SPECT imaging after gastric mucosal labeling with 99mTc-pertechnetate has also been used to noninvasively measure gastric volumes to evaluate gastric accommodation.

SPECT to assess gastric volume is performed by administering an intravenous dose of 99mTc-pertechnetate and then obtaining tomographic images in an axial plane with the patient in the supine position with a large field-of-view dual-head gamma camera system.132, 142 Data are computer processed to create a 3-dimensional image of the stomach. Using these images, gastric volume can be determined. Comparisons of gastric volume in fasting and postprandial periods allow for the meal-induced accommodation response to be estimated. The differences in fasting and postprandial volumes are typically expressed as either volume difference or volume ratio. Gastric volumes estimated by SPECT have been compared with gastric volumes estimated by barostat.142 Ratios of fasting to postprandial volumes measured by SPECT and barostat were highly correlated (r = 0.8; P = .0001). Gastric volumes in both the fasting and postprandial states measured by SPECT were significantly greater than volumes measured by barostat, although the volumes were significantly correlated (fasting: r = 0.60; P = .02; postprandial: r = 0.64, P = .008). This is not surprising because SPECT measures total gastric volume while the barostat can measure volume in either the proximal or distal stomach but not both simultaneously. Fasting and postprandial gastric volumes measured by SPECT are comparable to MRI, but the postprandial changes measured by SPECT are higher than those measured by MRI.116 The ability to assess volumes for the entire stomach and its noninvasive nature are advantages of SPECT over barostat. In addition to its ability to evaluate the entire stomach, SPECT has the additional advantage over barostat in that it is noninvasive and requires no intubation.

SPECT has been used in the evaluation of patients with functional dyspepsia and prior fundoplication.75, 142 In patients with functional dyspepsia, impaired postprandial accommodation is identified in more than 40% of subjects and symptom associations, while not consistently seen, have been identified with bloating, pain, weight loss, and fullness.75, 142 SPECT, along with barostat, confirms the decreased proximal gastric volumes expected in the postfundoplication patient.75

The disadvantages of SPECT are that it is not routinely available and involves radiation exposure. In addition, the imaging is performed with the patient in the supine position, eliminating the influence of gravity. The image capture time of SPECT makes it less responsive than barostat with respect to changes in gastric volume. The physiologic relevance of this is unclear because postprandial changes typically occur in a time frame that is easily and accurately captured by both methods.

Thus, SPECT is a noninvasive technique that allows for the evaluation of both total and regional gastric volumes as well as postprandial changes in gastric volumes. SPECT is not widely available, and it currently is not used in clinical practice. It is currently used primarily in clinical research to assess the effects of various potential therapeutic agents on gastric function.

Drink tests 

Drink tests were originally developed as a noninvasive means to assess upper digestive sensation and, perhaps, gastric accommodation.143 They are well tolerated, inexpensive, and easy to perform. Drink tests can be performed using either water or nutrient-containing solutions.143 Variability in test performance includes the type of liquid used (water or nutrient) and the rate of administration; this variability has limited our understanding of the exact physiologic parameters measured by the test.

Drink tests are most commonly performed in patients with functional dyspepsia or gastroparesis, and many patients with these conditions will achieve satiation or develop dyspeptic symptoms at ingested volumes below those typically required to achieve these end points in controls. However, specific dyspeptic symptoms are not associated with an abnormal drink test.71, 143 Some patients report fullness at volumes (<50 mL) that clearly defy physiologic parameters, suggesting that central factors clearly influence test results. Experimentally induced anxiety is associated with decreased gastric compliance and increased symptom scores during a standard nutrient drink challenge26; correlations between drink test volumes and general psychiatric distress in patients with functional dyspepsia have been modest at best.143, 144

Drink tests, accommodation, and gastric emptying 

Tack and colleagues reported a good correlation between barostat-measured accommodation and total calories consumed during a nutrient drink test administered at 15 mL/min145; however, Boeckxstaens et al found no correlation between drinking capacity and fundal accommodation to a meal.71 Using SPECT, Gonenne et al found that the maximal tolerated nutrient drink test volume explained only 13% and 3% of the variations in fasting and postprandial volumes.146 Recently, van den Elzen and colleagues have shown that drinking capacity may be more related to distal rather than proximal stomach function.147 The correlation between maximal tolerated drink test volume and the fractional rate of gastric emptying has been evaluated in 2 studies that reported correlations of 0.40 and 0.48.74, 145

Indications for drink tests 

The nutrient drink test may have a role as a noninvasive test for gastric accommodation. However, given that it is unclear exactly what drink tests measure (accommodation and/or hypersensitivity), the role of drink tests in clinical practice remains to be established and the test should be reserved for use in clinical research studies evaluating patients with functional dyspepsia.148, 149 At present there are no data demonstrating a role for drink tests in guiding therapy.

Functional Neuroimaging 

The application of functional neuroimaging techniques using either functional MRI or positron emission tomography has called attention to the fact that the central nervous system and enteric nervous system are intricately linked with respect to gut function and sensation such that they must be concomitantly evaluated in both clinical and investigative settings. These modalities have “brought into the loop” the important role that the central mechanisms of pain processing, arousal, and emotionality exert on the generation, interpretation, and reporting of digestive symptoms. To date, much of the neuroimaging data in functional gastrointestinal disorders has been obtained from patients with irritable bowel syndrome.16 Few studies have been performed in patients with other functional gastrointestinal disorders such as noncardiac chest pain and functional dyspepsia.

Lu et al studied cortical representation of fundal distention in healthy subjects with functional MRI.150 Fundal distention activated a number of cortical and subcortical structures typically involved in the central pain matrix. These included the thalamus, insular cortex, anterior and posterior cingulate cortices, basal ganglia, caudate nuclei, amygdala, brain stem, cerebellum, and prefrontal cortex. A similar study using (15)O-water positron emission tomography in healthy subjects and patients with functional dyspepsia showed that both groups had similar regions of increased cerebral blood flow following fundal distention but that activation occurred at lower distending pressures in patients with functional dyspepsia.151 Ladabaum et al have shown that antral distention in healthy subjects produces activation in structures involved in somatic pain processing152; noxious fundic distention activates predominately frontolimbic networks of brain regions.153

Presently there is no defined clinical role for functional neuroimaging in the assessment of functional digestive disorders. These modalities exist as research tools to further define the neurobiological link between psychological abnormalities and visceral hypersensitivity.

Back to Article Outline

Concluding Remarks 

Gastric function is complex, and a variety of modalities exist for assessment of motor function, accommodation, and sensation. Improved testing of gastric emptying has been developed with standardized protocols for scintigraphy. Newer tests are available to assess gastric emptying, including pH/pressure capsule and breath testing. Gastric accommodation can be assessed less invasively than with the barostat using either SPECT imaging or MRI. Indirect assessment of gastric accommodation may be provided with a nutrient drink test. Importantly, many of these newer modalities are noninvasive, do not involve radiation, and may offer office-based assessment of patients with functional gastroduodenal disorders. Most of these techniques are still deeply rooted in a research role, and the clinical implications of test results with respect to pathophysiology and therapy are still to be discerned. Nevertheless, as our diagnostic armamentarium expands, the potential for a richer understanding of digestive function in health and disease looms large. The ability to query the various parameters of gastric function in diverse, minimally invasive ways will allow for broader applications of techniques that may better define the associations of upper digestive symptoms with alterations in gastric neuromuscular or central nervous system function. These techniques also allow better understanding of the impact of various therapies on gastric physiology and the central nervous system as well. In the future, it is plausible that clinicians will be able to use selected tests chosen on the basis of clinical variables that will result in the implementation of effective treatments leading to improved clinical outcomes.

Back to Article Outline

References 

  1. Parkman HP, Harris AD, Krevsky B, et al. Gastroduodenal motility and dysmotility: update on techniques available for available for evaluation. Am J Gastroenterol. 1995;90:869–892
  2. Camilleri M, Hasler W, Parkman HP, et al. Measurement of gastroduodenal motility in the GI laboratory. Gastroenterology. 1998;115:747–762
  3. Camilleri M. Integrated upper gastrointestinal response to food intake. Gastroenterology. 2006;131:640–658
  4. Cannon W, Lieb C. The receptive relaxation of the stomach. Am J Physiol. 1911;29:267–273
  5. Villanova N, Azpiroz F, Malagelada JR. Gastrogastric reflexes regulating gastric tone and their relationship to perception. Am J Physiol. 1997;273:G464–G469
  6. Jahnberg T, Martinson J, Hulten L, et al. Dynamic gastric response to expansion before and after vagotomy. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1975;10:593–598
  7. Feinle C, Grundy D, Fried M. Modulation of gastric distension-induced sensations by small intestinal receptors. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2001;280:G51–G57
  8. Boeckxstaens GE, Hirsch DP, Kuiken SD, et al. The proximal stomach and postprandial symptoms in functional dyspeptics. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:40–48
  9. Tack J, Demedts I, Meulemans A, et al. Role of nitric oxide in the gastric accommodation reflex and in meal induced satiety in humans. Gut. 2002;51:219–224
  10. Tonini M, De Giorgio R, De Ponti F, et al. Role of nitric oxide- and vasoactive intestinal polypeptide-containing neurones in human gastric fundus strip relaxations. Br J Pharmacol. 2000;129:12–20
  11. Thumshirn M, Camilleri M, Choi MG, et al. Modulation of gastric sensory and motor functions by nitrergic and alpha2-adrenergic agents in humans. Gastroenterology. 1999;116:573–585
  12. Sawchenko PE. Central connections of the sensory and motor nuclei of the vagus nerve. J Auton Nerv Syst. 1983;9:13–26
  13. Aziz Q, Thompson DG. Brain-gut axis in health and disease. Gastroenterology. 1998;114:559–578
  14. Almeida TF, Roizenblatt S, Tufik S. Afferent pain pathways: a neuroanatomical review. Brain Res. 2004;1000:40–56
  15. Drossman DA. Functional abdominal pain syndrome. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;2:353–365
  16. Jones MP, Dilley JB, Drossman D, et al. Brain-gut connections in functional GI disorders: anatomic and physiologic relationships. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2006;18:91–103
  17. Näslund E, Hellström PM. Appetite signaling: from gut peptides and enteric nerves to brain. Physiol Behav. 2007;92:256–262
  18. Hornby PJ. Central neurocircuitry associated with emesis. Am J Med. 2001;111(Suppl 8A):106S–112S
  19. Bush G, Luu P, Posner MI. Cognitive and emotional influences in anterior cingulate cortex. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000;4:215–222
  20. Price DD. Psychological and neural mechanisms of the affective dimension of pain. Science. 2000;288:1769–1772
  21. Derbyshire SW. A systematic review of neuroimaging data during visceral stimulation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:12–20
  22. Melzack R, Wall P. Gate-control and other mechanisms. In:  Melzack R,  Wall P editor. The challenge of pain. 2nd ed.. London, England: Pelican Books; 1988;p. 165–193
  23. Vogt BA, Watanabe H, Grootoonk S, et al. Topography of diprenorphine binding in human cingulate gyrus and adjacent cortex derived from coregistered PET and MR images. Hum Brain Mapp. 1995;3:1–12
  24. Damasio AR, Grabowski TJ, Bechara A, et al. Subcortical and cortical brain activity during the feeling of self-generated emotions. Nat Neurosci. 2000;3:1049–1056
  25. Phillips ML, Drevets WC, Rauch SL, et al. Neurobiology of emotion perception I: the neural basis of normal emotion perception. Biol Psychiatry. 2003;54:504–514
  26. Geeraerts B, Vandenberghe J, Van Oudenhove L, et al. Influence of experimentally induced anxiety on gastric sensorimotor function in humans. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:1437–1444
  27. Van Oudenhove L, Vandenberghe J, Geeraerts B, et al. Relationship between anxiety and gastric sensorimotor function in functional dyspepsia. Psychosom Med. 2007;69:455–463
  28. Yaguez L, Coen S, Gregory LJ, et al. Brain response to visceral aversive conditioning: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Gastroenterology. 2005;128:1819–1829
  29. Parkman HP, Hasler WL, Fisher RS. American Gastroenterological Association technical review on the diagnosis and treatment of gastroparesis. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:1592–1622
  30. Stanghellini V, Tosetti C, Paternico A, et al. Risk indicators of delayed gastric emptying of solids in patients with functional dyspepsia. Gastroenterology. 1996;110:1036–1042
  31. Sarnelli G, Caenepeel P, Geypens B, et al. Symptoms associated with impaired gastric emptying of solids and liquids in functional dyspepsia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:783–788
  32. Horowitz M, Harding PE, Maddox AF, et al. Gastric and oesophageal emptying in patients with type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia. 1989;32:151–159
  33. Koch KL, Stern RM, Stewart WR, et al. Gastric emptying and gastric myoelectrical activity in patients with diabetic gastroparesis: effect of long-term domperidone treatment. Am J Gastroenterol. 1989;84:1069–1075
  34. Talley NJ, Shuter B, McCrudden G, et al. Lack of association between gastric emptying of solids and symptoms in nonulcer dyspepsia. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1989;11:625–630
  35. Jones KL, Russo A, Stevens JE, et al. Predictors of delayed gastric emptying in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:1264–1269
  36. Snape WJ, Battle WM, Schwartz SS, et al. Metoclopramide to treat gastroparesis due to diabetes mellitus: a double-blind, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1982;96:444–446
  37. Camilleri M, Malagelada JR, Abell TL, et al. Effect of six weeks of treatment with Cisapride in gastroparesis and intestinal pseudoobstruction. Gastroenterology. 1989;96:704–712
  38. Jian R, Ducrot F, Ruskone A, et al. Symptomatic, radionuclide and therapeutic assessment of chronic idiopathic dyspepsia. Dig Dis Sci. 1989;34:657–664
  39. McCallum RW, Cynshi O Investigative Team. Clinical trial: effect of mitemcinal (a motilin agonist) on gastric emptying in patients with gastroparesis—a randomized, multicentre, placebo-controlled study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;26:1121–1130
  40. Soykan I, Sivri B, Sarosiek I, et al. Demography, clinical characteristics, psychological profiles, treatment and long-term follow-up of patients with gastroparesis. Dig Dis Sci. 1998;43:2398–2404
  41. Eagon JC, Miedema BW, Kelly KA. Postgastrectomy syndromes. Surg Clin North Am. 1992;72:445–465
  42. Kong M-F, Horowitz M, Jones KL, et al. Natural history of diabetic gastroparesis. Diabetes Care. 1998;22:503–507
  43. Nowak TV, Johnson CP, Kalbfleisch JH, et al. Highly variable gastric emptying in patients with insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Gut. 1995;37:23–29
  44. Schwartz JG, Green GM, Guan D, et al. Rapid gastric emptying of a solid pancake meal in type II diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 1996;19:468–471
  45. Bharucha AE, Camilleri M, Forstrom LA, et al. Relationship between clinical features and gastric emptying disturbances in diabetes mellitus. Clin Endocrinol. 2009;70:415–420
  46. Frank JW, Saslow SB, Camilleri M, et al. Mechanism of accelerated gastric emptying of liquids and hyperglycemia in patients with type II diabetes mellitus. Gastroenterology. 1995;109:755–765
  47. Horowitz M, Harding PE, Maddox AF, et al. Gastric and oesophageal emptying in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1986;1:97–113
  48. Rayner CK, Samsom M, Jones KL, et al. Relationships of upper gastrointestinal motor and sensory function with glycemic control. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:371–381
  49. Ueno N, Inui A, Asakawa A, et al. Erythromycin improves glycaemic control in patients with type II diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia. 2000;43:411–415
  50. Braden B, Enghofer M, Schaub M, et al. Long-term cisapride treatment improves diabetic gastroparesis but not glycaemic control. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2002;16:1341–1346
  51. Lehmann R, Honegger RA, Feinle C, et al. Glucose control is not improved by accelerating gastric emptying in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and gastroparesis (A pilot study with cisapride as a model drug). Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2003;111:255–261
  52. Takahashi T, Nakamura K, Itoh H, et al. Impaired expression of nitric oxide synthase in gastric myenteric plexus of spontaneously diabetic rats. Gastroenterology. 1997;113:1535–1544
  53. Ordog T, Takayama I, Cheung WK, et al. Remodeling of networks of interstitial cells of Cajal in a murine model of diabetic gastroparesis. Diabetes. 2000;49:1731–1739
  54. He CL, Soffer EE, Ferris CD, et al. Loss of interstitial cells of Cajal and inhibitory innervation in insulin-dependent diabetes. Gastroenterology. 2001;121:427–434
  55. Ejskjaer NT, Bradley JL, Buxton-Thomas MS, et al. Novel surgical treatment and gastric pathology in diabetic gastroparesis. Diabet Med. 1999;16:488–495
  56. Fraser RJ, Horowitz M, Maddox AF, et al. Hyperglycemia slows gastric emptying in type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia. 1990;33:675–680
  57. Jebbink RJA, Samsom M, Bruijs PPM, et al. Hyperglycemia induces abnormalities of gastric myoelectrical activity in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Gastroenterology. 1994;107:1390–1397
  58. Samsom M, Salet GAM, Roelofs JMM, et al. Compliance of the proximal stomach and dyspeptic symptoms in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Dig Dis Sci. 1995;40:2037–2042
  59. Jones KL, Horowitz M, Berry M, et al. Blood glucose concentrations influences postprandial fullness in IDDM. Diabetes Care. 1997;29:1141–1146
  60. Lee CW, Kelly JJ, Wassef WY. Complications of bariatric surgery. Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2007;23:636–643
  61. Tack J. Gastric motor disorders. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2007;21:633–644
  62. Vecht J, Masclee AA, Lamers CB. The dumping syndrome (Current insights into pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment). Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl. 1997;223:21–27
  63. Jian R, Lemann M, Flourie B, et al. Clinical relevance of scintigraphic measurement of gastric emptying of a solid-liquid meal in the dumping syndrome. Hepatogastroenterology. 1992;39:17–21
  64. Lin HC, Van Citters GW, Zhao XT, et al. Fat intolerance depends on rapid gastric emptying. Dig Dis Sci. 1999;44:330–335
  65. Delgado-Aros S, Camilleri M, Cremonini F, et al. Contributions of gastric volumes and gastric emptying to meal size and postmeal symptoms in functional dyspepsia. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:1685–1694
  66. Schwartz JG, Green GM, Guan D, et al. Rapid gastric emptying of a solid pancake meal in type II diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 1996;19:468–471
  67. Namin F, Jitan P, Joker I, et al. Clinical hallmarks of cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) in adults and role of long-term tricyclic therapy. (abstr) Gastroenterology. 2006;130(Suppl 2):A601
  68. Fajardo NR, Locke GR, Talley NJ. Cyclic vomiting syndrome is associated with rapid early gastric emptying. (abstr) Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:143
  69. Tack J, Talley NJ, Camilleri M, et al. Functional gastroduodenal disorders. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:1466–1479
  70. Talley NJ, Verlinden M, Jones M. Can symptoms discriminate among those with delayed or normal gastric emptying in dysmotility-like dyspepsia?. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:1422–1428
  71. Boeckxstaens GE, Hirsch DP, van den Elzen BD, et al. Impaired drinking capacity in patients with functional dyspepsia: relationship with proximal stomach function. Gastroenterology. 2001;121:1054–1063
  72. Quartero AO, de Wit NJ, Lodder AC, et al. Disturbed solid-phase gastric emptying in functional dyspepsia: a meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci. 1998;43:2028–2033
  73. Perri F, Clemente R, Festa V, et al. Patterns of symptoms in functional dyspepsia: role of Helicobacter pylori infection and delayed gastric emptying. Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;93:2082–2088
  74. Cuomo R, Sarnelli G, Grasso R, et al. Functional dyspepsia symptoms, gastric emptying and satiety provocative test: analysis of relationships. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2001;36:1030–1036
  75. Bredenoord AJ, Chial HJ, Camilleri M, et al. Gastric accommodation and emptying in evaluation of patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003;1:264–272
  76. Thumshirn M, Camilleri M, Saslow SB, et al. Gastric accommodation in non-ulcer dyspepsia and the roles of Helicobacter pylori infection and vagal function. Gut. 1999;44:55–64
  77. Tack J, Caenepeel P, Fischler B, et al. Symptoms associated with hypersensitivity to gastric distention in functional dyspepsia. Gastroenterology. 2001;121:526–535
  78. Salet GA, Samsom M, Roelofs JM, et al. Responses to gastric distension in functional dyspepsia. Gut. 1998;42:823–829
  79. Abell TL, Adams KA, Boles RG, et al. Cyclic vomiting syndrome in adults. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008;20:269–284
  80. Stickler GB. Relationship between cyclic vomiting syndrome and migraine. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2005;44:505–508
  81. Turchetti A, Guglielmi S, Fossati C, et al. Gastric emptying time in cyclic vomiting syndrome in children. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2004;8:295–298
  82. Namin F, Patel J, Lin Z, et al. Clinical, psychiatric and manometric profile of cyclic vomiting syndrome in adults and response to tricyclic therapy. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2007;19:196–202
  83. Tache Y, Martinez V, Million M, et al. Stress and the gastrointestinal tract III (Stress-related alterations of gut motor function: role of brain corticotropin-releasing factor receptors). Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2001;280:G173–G177
  84. Haug TT, Svebak S, Hausken T, et al. Low vagal activity as mediating mechanism for the relationship between personality factors and gastric symptoms in functional dyspepsia. Psychosom Med. 1994;56:181–186
  85. Lorena SL, Tinois E, Brunetto SQ, et al. Gastric emptying and intragastric distribution of a solid meal in functional dyspepsia: influence of gender and anxiety. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2004;38:230–236
  86. Abell TL, Malagelada JR, Lucas AR, et al. Gastric electromechanical and neurohormonal function in anorexia nervosa. Gastroenterology. 1987;93:958–965
  87. Zipfel S, Sammet I, Rapps N, et al. Gastrointestinal disturbances in eating disorders: clinical and neurobiological aspects. Auton Neurosci. 2006;129:99–106
  88. Kamal N, Chami T, Andersen A, et al. Delayed gastrointestinal transit times in anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. Gastroenterology. 1991;101:1320–1324
  89. Hirakawa M, Okada T, Iida M, et al. Small bowel transit time measured by hydrogen breath test in patients with anorexia nervosa. Dig Dis Sci. 1990;35:733–736
  90. Kiss A, Bergmann H, Abatzi TA, et al. Oesophageal and gastric motor activity in patients with bulimia nervosa. Gut. 1990;31:259–265
  91. Geliebter A, Melton PM, McCray RS, et al. Gastric capacity, gastric emptying, and test-meal intake in normal and bulimic women. Am J Clin Nutr. 1992;56:656–661
  92. Devlin MJ, Walsh BT, Guss JL, et al. Postprandial cholecystokinin release and gastric emptying in patients with bulimia nervosa. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997;65:114–120
  93. Rigaud D, Bedig G, Merrouche M, et al. Delayed gastric emptying in anorexia nervosa is improved by completion of a renutrition program. Dig Dis Sci. 1988;33:919–925
  94. Papadopoulos V, Mimidis K. The rumination syndrome in adults: a review of the pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment. J Postgrad Med. 2007;53:203–206
  95. Soykan I, Chen J, Kendall BJ, et al. The rumination syndrome: clinical and manometric profile, therapy, and long-term outcome. Dig Dis Sci. 1997;42:1866–1872
  96. O'Brien MD, Bruce BK, Camilleri M. The rumination syndrome: clinical features rather than manometric diagnosis. Gastroenterology. 1995;108:1024–1029
  97. Galil MA, Critchley M, Mackie CR. Isotope gastric emptying tests in clinical practice: expectation, outcome, and utility. Gut. 1993;34:916–919
  98. Abell TL, Camilleri M, Donohoe K, et al. Consensus recommendations for gastric emptying scintigraphy (A joint report of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and the American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society). Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:753–763
  99. Tougas GH, Eaker EY, Abell TL, et al. Assessment of gastric emptying using a low fat meal: Establishment of international control values. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95:1456–1462
  100. Thomforde GM, Camilleri M, Phillips SF, et al. Evaluation of an inexpensive screening scintigraphic test of gastric emptying. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:93–96
  101. Guo J-P, Maurer AH, Fisher RS, et al. Extending gastric emptying scintigraphy from two to four hours detects more patients with gastroparesis. Dig Dis Sci. 2001;46:24–29
  102. Lartigue S, Bizais Y, Des Varannes SB, et al. Inter- and intrasubject variability of solid and liquid gastric emptying parameters (A scintigraphic study in healthy subjects and diabetic patients). Dig Dis Sci. 1994;39:109–115
  103. Datz FL, Christian PE, Moore J. Gender-related differences in gastric emptying. J Nucl Med. 1987;28:1204–1207
  104. Gill RC, Murphy PD, Hooper HR, et al. Effect of the menstrual cycle on gastric emptying. Digestion. 1987;36:168–174
  105. Troncon LE, Bennett RJ, Ahluwalia NK, et al. Abnormal intragastric distribution of food during gastric emptying in functional dyspepsia patients. Gut. 1994;35:327–332
  106. Gonlachanvit S, Maurer AH, Fisher RS, et al. Regional gastric emptying abnormalities in functional dyspepsia and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2006;18:894–904
  107. Karamanolis G, Caenepeel P, Arts J, et al. Determinants of symptom pattern in idiopathic severely delayed gastric emptying: gastric emptying rate or proximal stomach dysfunction?. Gut. 2007;56:29–36
  108. Piessevaux H, Tack J, Wairand S, et al. Intragastric distribution of a standardized meal in health and functional dyspepsia: correlation with specific symptoms. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2003;15:447–455
  109. Kuo B, McCallum RW, Koch K, et al. Comparison of gastric emptying of a non-digestible capsule to a radiolabeled meal in healthy and gastroparetic subjects. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008;27:186–196
  110. Cassilly D, Kantor S, Knight L, et al. Gastric emptying of a nondigestible solid: assessment with simultaneous SmartPill pH and pressure capsule, antroduodenal manometry, gastric emptying scintigraphy. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008;20:311–319
  111. Camilleri M, Bharucha AE, DiLorenzo C, et al. American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society consensus statement on intraluminal measurement of gastrointestinal and colonic motility in clinical practice. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008;20:1269–1282
  112. 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;104:1640–1647
  113. Choi M-G, Camilleri M, Burton DD, et al. Reproducibility and simplification of 13C-octanoic acid breath test for gastric emptying of solids. Am J Gastroenterol. 1998;93:92–98
  114. Bromer MQ, Kantor SN, Wagner DA, et al. Simultaneous measurement of gastric emptying with a simple muffin meal using 13C-octanoate breath test and scintigraphy in normal subjects and patients with in dyspeptic symptoms. Dig Dis Sci. 2002;47:1657–1663
  115. Szarka LA, Camilleri M, Vella A, et al. A stable isotope breat thest with a standard meal for abnormal gastric emptying of solids in the clinic and in research. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6:635–643
  116. Kim D-Y, Myung S-J, Camilleri M. Novel testing of human gastric motor and sensory functions: rationale, methods, and potential applications in clinical practice. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95:3365–3373
  117. Gentilcore D, Hausken T, Horowitz M, et al. Measurements of gastric emptying of low- and high-nutrient liquids using 3D ultrasonography and scintigraphy in healthy subjects. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2006;18:1062–1068
  118. Fidler J, Bharucha AE, Camilleri M, et al. Application of magnetic resonance imaging to measure fasting and postprandial volumes in humans. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2009;21:42–51
  119. Treier R, Steingoetter A, Weishaupt D, et al. Gastric motor function and emptying in the right decubitus and seated body position as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;23:331–338
  120. Fraser RJ, Horowitz M, Maddox AF, et al. Postprandial antropyloroduodenal motility and gastric emptying in gastroparesis—effects of cisapride. Gut. 1994;35:172–178
  121. Mearin F, Camilleri M, Malagelada J-R. Pyloric dysfunction in diabetics with recurrent nausea and vomiting. Gastroenterology. 1986;90:1919–1925
  122. Dooley CO, el Newihi HM, Zeidler A, et al. Abnormalities of the migrating motor complex in diabetics with autonomic neuropathy and diarrhea. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1988;23:217–223
  123. Camilleri M, Malagelada J-R. Abnormal intestinal motility in diabetics with the gastroparesis syndrome. Eur J Clin Invest. 1984;14:420–427
  124. Camilleri M, Brown ML, Malagelada J-R. Relationship between impaired gastric emptying and abnormal gastrointestinal motility. Gastroenterology. 1986;91:94–99
  125. Camilleri M. Study of human gastroduodenojejunal motility—applied physiology in clinical practice. Dig Dis Sci. 1993;38:785–794
  126. Frank JW, Sarr MG, Camilleri M. Use of gastroduodenal manometry to differentiate mechanical and functional intestinal obstruction: an analysis of clinical outcome. Am J Gastroenterol. 1994;89:339–344
  127. Verne GN, Eaker EY, Hardy E, et al. Effect of octreotide and erythromycin on idiopathic and scleroderma-associated intestinal pseudoobstruction. Dig Dis Sci. 1995;40:1892–1901
  128. Soffer E, Thongsawat S. Clinical value of duodenojejunal manometry (Its usefulness in diagnosis and management of patients with gastrointestinal symptoms). Dig Dis Sci. 1996;41:859–863
  129. Hyman PE, DiLorenzo C, McAdams L, et al. Predicting the clinical response to cisapride in children with chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction. Am J Gastroenterol. 1993;88:832–836
  130. Chen JZ, McCallum RW. Clinical applications of electrogastrography. Am J Gastroenterol. 1993;88:1324–1336
  131. Parkman HP, Hasler WL, Barnett JL, et al. Electrogastrography: a document prepared by the gastric section of the American Motility Society Clinical GI Motility Testing Task Force. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2003;15:488–497
  132. De Schepper HU, Cremonini F, Chitkara D, et al. Assessment of gastric accommodation: overview and evaluation of current methods. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2004;16:275–285
  133. Whitehead WE, Delvaux M. Standardization of barostat procedures for testing smooth muscle tone and sensory thresholds in the gastrointestinal tract (The Working Team of Glaxo-Wellcome Research, UK). Dig Dis Sci. 1997;42:223–241
  134. Mearin F, Cucala M, Azpiroz F, et al. The origin of symptoms on the brain-gut axis in functional dyspepsia. Gastroenterology. 1991;101:999–1006
  135. Tack J, Piessevaux H, Coulie B, et al. Role of impaired gastric accommodation to a meal in functional dyspepsia. Gastroenterology. 1998;115:1346–1352
  136. Hebbard GS, Sun WM, Dent J, et al. Hyperglycaemia affects proximal gastric motor and sensory function in normal subjects. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1996;8:211–217
  137. Kumar A, Attaluri A, Hashmi S, et al. Visceral hypersensitivity and impaired accommodation in refractory diabetic gastroparesis. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008;20:635–642
  138. Samsom M, Roelofs JM, Akkermans LM, et al. Proximal gastric motor activity in response to a liquid meal in type I diabetes mellitus with autonomic neuropathy. Dig Dis Sci. 1998;43:491–496
  139. Iovino P, Valentini G, Ciacci C, et al. Proximal stomach function in systemic sclerosis: relationship with autonomic nerve function. Dig Dis Sci. 2001;46:723–730
  140. Rhee PL, Kim YH, Son HJ, et al. Evaluation of individual symptoms cannot predict presence of gastric hypersensitivity in functional dyspepsia. Dig Dis Sci. 2000;45:1680–1684
  141. Tutuian R, Vos R, Karamanoli G, et al. An audit of technical pitfalls of gastric barostat testing in dyspepsia. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2008;20:113–118
  142. Kim DY, Delgado-Aros S, Camilleri M, et al. Noninvasive measurement of gastric accommodation in patients with idiopathic nonulcer dyspepsia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:3099–3105
  143. Jones MP, Maganti K. Symptoms, gastric function, and psychosocial factors in functional dyspepsia. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2004;38:866–872
  144. Jones MP, Hoffman S, Shah D, et al. The water load test: observations from healthy controls and patients with functional dyspepsia. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2003;284:G896–G904
  145. Sarnelli G, Caenepeel P, Geypens B, et al. Symptoms associated with impaired gastric emptying of solids and liquids in functional dyspepsia. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:783–788
  146. Gonenne J, Castillo EJ, Camilleri M, et al. Does the nutrient drink test accurately predict postprandial gastric volume in health and community dyspepsia?. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2005;17:44–50
  147. van den Elzen BD, Bennink RJ, Holman R, et al. Impaired drinking capacity in patients with functional dyspepsia: intragastric distribution and distal stomach volume. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2007;19:968–976
  148. Mimidis K. Drinking tests in functional dyspepsia: what do they really measure?. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2007;19:947–950
  149. Koch KL, Hong SP, Xu L. Reproducibility of gastric myoelectrical activity and the water load test in patients with dysmotility-like dyspepsia symptoms and in control subjects. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2000;31:125–129
  150. Lu CL, Wu YT, Yeh TC, et al. Neuronal correlates of gastric pain induced by fundus distension: a 3T-fMRI study. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2004;16:575–587
  151. Vandenberghe J, Dupont P, Van Oudenhove L, et al. Regional cerebral blood flow during gastric balloon distention in functional dyspepsia. Gastroenterology. 2007;132:1684–1693
  152. Ladabaum U, Minoshima S, Hasler WL, et al. Gastric distension correlates with activation of multiple cortical and subcortical regions. Gastroenterology. 2001;120:369–376
  153. Ladabaum U, Roberts TP, McGonigle DJ. Gastric fundic distension activates fronto-limbic structures but not primary somatosensory cortex: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroimage. 2007;34:724–732
  154. Lacy BE, Koch KL, Crowell MD. Chapter 10: Manometry. In:  Schuster MM,  Crowell MD,  Koch KL editor. Schuster atlas of gastrointestinal motility in health and disease. Second edition. Hamilton, ON: BC Decker Inc; 2002;p. 135–150
  155. Chey WD, Shapiro B, Zawadski A, et al. Gastric emptying characteristics of a novel (13)C-octanoate-labeled muffin meal. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2001;32:394–399

 Conflicts of interest The authors disclose the following: Dr Parkman serves as a consultant to SmartPill and Tranzyme. He has research support from SmartPill and Medtronic and has received honoraria from SmartPill and Medtronic for lecturing. Dr Jones serves as a consultant to Boehringer-Ingelheim.

PII: S0016-5085(09)00219-4

doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2009.02.039

Gastroenterology
Volume 136, Issue 5 , Pages 1526-1543, May 2009