You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 140 No. 9, September 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Paper
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (9)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Surgery
 •Surgical Interventions
 •Gastrointestinal/ Upper Foregut
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Gastric Electrical Stimulation

An Alternative Surgical Therapy for Patients With Gastroparesis

Rodney J. Mason, PhD, MD; John Lipham, MD; Gordon Eckerling, MD; Alan Schwartz, MD; Tom R. DeMeester, MD

Arch Surg. 2005;140:841-848.

Hypothesis  Gastric electrical stimulation is an alternative to gastrectomy in patients with refractory gastroparesis.

Design  Retrospective case series with a median follow-up of 20 months.

Settings  A tertiary care university hospital and a university-affiliated community hospital.

Patients  Twenty-nine patients (22 women, 7 men; median age, 39 years; age range, 20-87 years) with debilitating gastroparesis who were referred for gastrectomy from December 10, 2001, through October 1, 2004. Twenty-four patients had type 1 diabetic gastroparesis and 5 patients had idiopathic gastroparesis.

Interventions  Placement of a gastric stimulator device laparoscopically in 24 patients and by laparotomy in 5 patients.

Main Outcome Measures  Morbidity and mortality of the procedure, symptom control, hospital readmissions, need for supplemental nutritional support, body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters), and gastric emptying.

Results  Follow-up results were available in 27 patients. There was no 30-day mortality or morbidity in 4 patients. The median hospital stay was 3 days. All of the patients tolerated an oral diet at discharge. Symptom control was excellent to good in 19 patients. Nutritional support was discontinued in the 19 patients who were dependent on supplemental feeding before the procedure (P<.001). The median body mass index improved significantly (22.9 preoperatively vs 25.1 postoperatively; P = .006). The median gastric emptying rate (percentage per minute) was measured in 15 of the 27 patients postoperatively and showed significant improvement (0.17% per minute preoperatively vs 0.38% per minute postoperatively; P<.001). Additional procedures were required in 4 patients (owing to poor outcome in 3 patients).

Conclusions  Gastric electrical stimulation ameliorated symptoms, returned patients to normal oral nutritional intake, increased body mass index, improved gastric emptying rates, and is an alternative to gastrectomy in patients with end-stage gastric disease.


Author Affiliations: Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles (Drs Mason, Lipham, and DeMeester); and Digestive Health Center, Coastal Community Hospital, Santa Ana, Calif (Drs Eckerling and Schwartz).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Treatment options for patients with severe gastroparesis
Abrahamsson
Gut 2007;56:877-883.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2005 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.