An update on autonomic neuropathy affecting the gastrointestinal tract
- 141 Downloads
Gastrointestinal symptoms and disordered gut motility occur frequently in the diabetic population and are generally regarded as manifestations of gastrointestinal "autonomic dysfunction," although the relationships between both symptoms and dysmotility with abnormal cardiovascular autonomic function are weak. It is now recognized that the blood glucose concentration is both a determinant of and determined by gastrointestinal function. An improved de.nition of the underlying pathophysiology should facilitate the development of therapies that are targeted more effectively.
KeywordsGastric Emptying Cisapride Gastroparesis Autonomic Neuropathy Tegaserod
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References and Recommended Reading
- 1.Forster J, Damjanov I, Lin Z, et al.: Absence of the interstitial cells of Cajal in patients with gastroparesis and correlation with clinical findings. J Gastrointest Surg 2005, 2:588–590. An important study identifying the potential role of the ICC in diabetic gastroparesis. Full-thickness antral wall biopsies were obtained from 14 gastroparetic patients at the time of surgery for gastric electrical stimulation. A reduction or absence in the number of ICC was evident in a subset of patients, which correlated with greater motility disturbance, more symptoms, and a poorer response to therapy.Google Scholar
- 8.Hammer J, Abell T, Cutts T, Talley NJ. Epidemiology of disordered gastrointestinal function and impact of chronic gastrointestinal symptoms on quality of life. In Gastrointestinal Function in Diabetes Mellitus. Edited by Horowitz M, Samsom M. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons; 2004:1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Vinik AI, Maser RE, Mitchell BD, Freeman R: Diabetic autonomic neuropathy. Diabetes Care 2003, 26:1553–1579. A comprehensive review of autonomic neuropathy in diabetes, focusing largely on cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy, but with a concise summary of autonomic neuropathy involving the GI tract.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Abell TL, Bernstein RK, Cutts T, et al.: Treatment of gastroparesis: a multidisciplinary clinical review. The American Motility Task Force on Gastroparesis. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2006, 18:263–283. An excellent overview of the current approach to the management of gastroparesis, including summaries of new and emerging therapies.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 43.Murray CD, Martin NM, Patterson M, et al.: Ghrelin enhances gastric emptying in diabetic gastroparesis: a double blind, placebo controlled, crossover study. Gut 2005, 54:1693–1698. This is a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study in 10 diabetic patients requiring insulin. In response to a 2-hour infusion of ghrelin in the context of a euglycemic clamp, gastric emptying as assessed by ultrasound was accelerated in seven of 10 subjects. Ghrelin-based therapies may potentially represent a novel prokinetic class.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 45.McCallum RW, Rogel R, Fang JC, et al.: Mitemacil fumarate (GM-611) provided symptomatic relief of diabetic gastroparesis, especially in type 1 diabetics: results of a 12-week, multi-centre, double-blind, placebo controlled, randomized phase 2b study. Gastroenterology 2005, 128:A467.Google Scholar
- 54.Lin Z, Sarosiek I, Forster J, McCallum RW: Symptom responses, long-term outcomes and adverse events beyond 3 years of high-frequency gastric electrical stimulation for gastroparesis. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2006, 18:18–27. This study provides the most comprehensive follow-up of patients receiving gastric electrical stimulation. Data were collected at baseline, 1 year, and beyond 3 years in 55 patients (39 with diabetes). An improvement in symptom score and glycemic control, as well as a reduction in hospitalization and prokinetic medications, was seen. The study was uncontrolled.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 55.Abell T, Al-Juburi A, Bashed H, Miroch A: 13 years, 214 patients and over 5000 patient months: a long term report on gastric electric stimulation. Gastroenterology 2005, 50:1328–1334.Google Scholar