Digestive Diseases and Sciences

, Volume 46, Issue 10, pp 2245–2249

Validation of Electrode Placement in Neonatal Electrogastrography

  • Mal Patterson
  • Risto Rintala
  • David Lloyd
  • Laurence Abernethy
  • David Houghton
  • Janice Williams
Article
  • 77 Downloads

Abstract

Electrogastrography (EGG) is the transcutaneous measurement of gastric electrical activity. The aims of this study were to validate the electrode placement position in neonatal electrogastrography using ultrasonography to localise the stomach, and to describe the observed EGG frequency characteristics. Fifteen neonates with no known abdominal disorder were studied. Two bipolar EGG recordings were obtained from each subject, the first from electrodes placed at sites localized by ultrasound and the second from electrodes placed at the currently recommended sites. Paired sample t tests were used to compare electrode positioning and electrogastrographic data. There were 15 subjects with a mean age of 36 days (range 1–95). While there was a significant difference in the position of electrodes at each site, the EGG recordings did not differ. The 3-cycle/minute (2.6–3.7cpm) activity ranged from 30% to 84% of recorded time (mean at sites localized with ultrasound was 53%, and at currently recommended sites it was 50%; difference not significant, P = 0.155). Bradygastria (<2.6 cpm) was observed in the range of 2–29% of recorded time (mean at sites localised with ultrasound was 12.9%, and at currently recommended sites it was 11.7%; difference not significant, P = 0.40). Tachygastria (3.2–10 cpm) was shown to be in the range of 10–58% of recorded time (mean at sites localized with ultrasound was 33.3%, and at currently recommended sites it was 38.7%; difference not significant; P = 0.044). In conclusion, there was no significant difference between EGG recordings taken from electrode sites localized by ultrasound and those recommended by manufacturers of the electrogastrogram, thus confirming the validity of the manufacturer's recommended electrode positioning. The pattern of electrical control activity in the normal neonatal stomach appears to be different from that demonstrated in adults. Bradygastria and tachygastria are seen more frequently, with fewer periods of 3 cpm activity.

electrogastrography electrode placement stomach 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Alverez WC: The electrogastrogram and what it shows. Am J Physiol 58:476–493, 1922 TABLE 2. ELECTRODE POSITIONS: MEAN FRACTIONAL DISTANCES FOR DISPLACEMENT ABOVE UMBILICUS AND LATERAL DISPLACEMENT* Site Mean fractional distance from Umbilicus to xiphoid process (displacement above umbilicus) Ventral midline to left/right mid axillary lines (lateral displacement) Electrode 1 US 0.727 0.253 to the right SR 0.5 0.0 Electrode 2 US 0.594 0.35 to the left SR 0.09 0.3 to the left * US site: electrode site localized by ultrasound; SR site: electrode site recommended by Synectics. PATTERSON ET AL 2248 Digestive Diseases and Sciences, Vol. 46, No. 10 (October 2001) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen J, McCallum W: Clinical applications of electrogastrography. Am J Gastroenterol 88:1324–1336, 1993Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rothstein RD, Alavi A, Reynolds JC: Electrogastrography in patients with gastroparesis and effect of long-term cisapride. Dig Dis Sci 38:1518–1524, 1993Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cucchiara S, Minnella R, Riezzo G, Vallone G, Vallone P, Castellone F, Aurrichio S: Reversal of gastric electrical dysrhythmias by cisapride in children with functional dyspepsia. Dig Dis Sci. 37:1136–1140, 1992Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Devane SP, Ravelli AM, Bisset WM, Smith VV, Lake BD, Milla PJ. Gastric antral dysrhythmias in children with chronic intestinal pseudo obstruction. Gut 33:1477–1481, 1992Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen J, McCallum W: Principles of electrogastrography. Motility 23:15–18, 1994Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen J, McCallum W: Electrogastrography: Measurement, analysis and prospective applications. Med Biol Eng Comput 29:339–350, 1991Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tomomasa T, Itoh Z, Koizumi T, Kuroume T: Non mitigrating rhythmic activity in the stomach and duedenum of neonates. Biol Neonate 48:1–9, 1985Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tomomasa T, Miyazaki M, Nako Y, Kuroume T: Electrogastrography in neonates. J Perinatol 14:417–421, 1994Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van der Schee EJ, Grashuis JT: Running spectrum analysis as an aid in the representation and interpretation of electrogastrographic signals. Med Biol Eng Comput 25:57–62, 1987Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mirizzi N, Scafoglieriu U: Optimum direction of the Electrogastro-graphic signal in man. Med Biol Eng Comput 21:385–389, 1983Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abell TL, Malagelada J: Electrogastrography. Current assessment and future perspectives. Dig Dis Sci 33:982–992, 1988 ELECTROGASTROGRAPHY IN NEONATES 2249 Digestive Diseases and Sciences, Vol. 46, No. 10 (October 2001) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mal Patterson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Risto Rintala
    • 1
    • 2
  • David Lloyd
    • 2
  • Laurence Abernethy
    • 3
  • David Houghton
    • 3
  • Janice Williams
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Paediatric SurgeryAlder Hey Children's HospitalLiverpoolUK
  2. 2.Department of Child HealthUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyAlder Hey Children's HospitalLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations