Both gastric electrical stimulation and pyloric surgery offer long-term symptom improvement in patients with gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: Gastroparesis (GP) is hallmarked by nausea, vomiting, and early satiety. While dietary and medical therapy are the mainstay of treatment, surgery has been used to palliate symptoms. Two established first-line surgical options are gastric electrostimulation (GES) and pyloric procedures (PP) including pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy. We sought to compare these modalities' improvement in Gastroparesis cardinal symptom index (GCSI) subscores and potential predictors of therapy failure. METHODS: All patients undergoing surgery at a single institution were prospectively identified and separated by surgery: GES, PP, or combined GESPP. GCSI was collected preoperatively, at 6 weeks and 1 year. Postoperative GCSI score over 2.5 or receipt of another gastroparesis operation were considered treatment failures. Groups were compared using Pearson's chi-squared and Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were included: 18 GES, 51 PP, and 13 GESPP. Mean age was 44, BMI was 26.7, and 80% were female. Preoperative GCSI was 3.7. The PP group was older with more postsurgical gastroparesis. More patients with diabetes underwent GESPP. Preoperative symptom scores and gastric emptying were similar among all groups. All surgical therapies resulted in a significantly improved GCSI and nausea/vomiting subscore at 6 weeks and 1 year. Bloating improved initially, but relapsed in the GES and GESPP group. Satiety improved initially, but relapsed in the PP group. Fifty-nine (72%) had surgical success. Ten underwent additional surgery (7 crossed into the GESPP group, 3 underwent gastric resection). Treatment failures had higher preoperative GCSI, bloating, and satiety scores. Treatment failures and successes had similar preoperative gastric emptying. CONCLUSIONS: Both gastric electrical stimulation and pyloric surgery are successful gastroparesis treatments, with durable improvement in nausea and vomiting. Choice of operation should be guided by patient characteristics and discussion of surgical risks and benefits. Combination GESPP does not appear to confer an advantage over GES or PP alone.

Urinary Incontinence Medications: Patient-Initiated Concerns in Primary Care.

IMPORTANCE: Guideline-recommended medications for overactive bladder and urge urinary incontinence (OAB/UUI) are effective but have high costs and side effects. Little is known about patient concerns regarding these medications when prescribed by their primary care providers (PCPs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to describe PCP-patient interactions when prescribing medications for OAB/UUI, specifically clinical concerns, cost and authorization issues, and mode of communication for these interactions. STUDY DESIGN: Using electronic health records, we identified a retrospective cohort of women aged 18-89 years who were prescribed a medication for OAB/UUI during a primary care office visit from 2017 to 2018. We examined the electronic health record from initial prescription through 15 subsequent months for documentation of prior authorization requests and patient concerns about cost, side effects, or ineffectiveness. The association of patient demographics, comorbidity, and medication class with these concerns was examined with logistic regression models. RESULTS: Overall, 46.2% of patients (n = 123) had 1 or more OAB/UUI medication concerns, and 52 reported outside an office visit. Only higher comorbidity was associated with reduced concern of any type. Although the overall percent age of patients reporting concerns was similar by medication type, the patterns of concern type varied. Compared with those taking short-acting antimuscarinics, patients taking long-acting antimuscarinics other than oxybutynin were less likely to have side effect concerns (adjusted odds ratio 0.35, 95% CI 0.16-0.78) and more likely to have cost concerns (adjusted odds ratio 5.10, 95% CI 1.53-17.03). CONCLUSIONS: Patient concerns regarding OAB/UUI medications were common in primary care practices and frequently reported outside of office visits. However, the patterns of concerns (cost vs side effects) varied between medication classes.

Wisconsin's Enterra Therapy Experience: A multi-institutional review of gastric electrical stimulation for medically refractory gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: Gastric electrical stimulation is a treatment for symptoms of diabetic or idiopathic gastroparesis refractory to medical management. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of gastric electrical stimulation in the state of Wisconsin during a more than 10-year period. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from patients undergoing implantation of the gastric electrical stimulation to initiate gastric electrical stimulation therapy at two Wisconsin institutions from 2005-2017. The Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index was administered during clinical encounters and over the phone preoperatively and postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 119 patients received gastric electrical stimulation therapy (64 diabetic and 55 idiopathic). All devices were placed laparoscopically. Mean follow-up was 34.1 ± 27.2 months in diabetic and 44.7 ± 26.2 months in idiopathic patients. A total of 18 patients died during the study interval (15.1%). No mortalities were device-related. Diabetics had the greatest rate of mortality (25%; mean interval of 17 ± 3 months post implantation). GCSI scores improved, and prokinetic and narcotic medication use decreased significantly at ≥1 year. Satisfaction scores were high. CONCLUSION: Gastric electrical stimulation therapy led to the improvement of symptoms of gastroparesis and a better quality of life. Patients were able to decrease the use of prokinetic and narcotic medications and achieve long-term satisfaction. Diabetic patients who develop symptomatic gastroparesis have a high mortality rate over time.