Electroceuticals for Neurogastroenterology and Motility Disorders.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an updated overview on use of electrostimulation in gastrointestinal motility disorders and obesity, with a focus on gastric electrical stimulation, vagal nerve stimulation and sacral nerve stimulation. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies on gastric electrical stimulation for chronic vomiting showed a decrease in frequency of vomiting, but without significant improvement in quality of life. Percutaneous vagal nerve stimulation shows some promise for both symptoms of gastroparesis and IBS. Sacral nerve stimulation does not appear effective for constipation. Studies of electroceuticals for treatment of obesity have quite varied results with less clinical penetrance of the technology. Results of studies on the efficacy of electroceuticals have been variable depending on pathology but this area remains promising. Improved mechanistic understanding, technology and more controlled trials will be helpful to establish a clearer role for electrostimulation in treatment of various GI disorders.

Pattern of methane levels with lactulose breath testing; can we shorten the test duration?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Methane levels in methane-positive lactulose breath tests are frequently elevated at time zero. We hypothesized that baseline methane level is sufficient to detect excessive methane production and thereby avoid extended testing. Our aim was to determine if baseline methane levels were sufficient to identify methane-positive individuals as defined by current guidelines. METHODS: A retrospective study of lactulose breath tests was conducted at an open access motility lab. A methane-positive study was defined as a methane level ≥10 ppm at any time. Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) was defined as a ≥20 ppm rise in hydrogen from baseline by 90 min. Dual-positive SIBO and methane studies were identified. Demographics, symptoms, and indications were recorded. RESULTS: Of 745 tests, 33.1%, 15.0%, and 3.1% were SIBO, methane, and dual-positive, respectively. Precisely 96.4% of methane-positive studies had methane levels ≥10 ppm within 90 min and 75.9% had levels ≥10 ppm at time 0. An additional elevation of ≥20 ppm over baseline within 90 min was observed in 32.1%. Of 22 methane-positive patients with constipation, methane levels were ≥10 ppm at baseline in 81.8% and were ≥10 ppm within 90 min in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 25% of methane-positive studies were not identified by a fasting methane level, but 96% were identified within 90 min. Most methane-positive studies did not have a rise of 20 ppm above baseline. Our findings suggest the lactulose breath test for hydrogen and methane can be complete at 90 min.

Gender-Specific Risk Factors for Reflux Esophagitis in a Predominantly Hispanic Population of a Large Safety-Net Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Defining factors associated with severe reflux esophagitis allows for identification of subgroups most at risk for complications of strictures and esophageal malignancy. We hypothesized there might be unique clinical features in patients with reflux esophagitis in a predominantly Hispanic population of a large, safety-net hospital. AIM: Define clinical and endoscopic features of reflux esophagitis in a predominantly Hispanic population of a large, safety-net hospital. METHODS: This is retrospective comparative study of outpatients and hospitalized patients identified with mild (Los Angeles Grade A/B) and severe (Los Angeles Grade C/D) esophagitis through an endoscopy database review. The electronic medical record was reviewed for demographic and clinical data. RESULTS: Reflux esophagitis was identified in 382/5925 individuals: 56.5% males and 79.8% Hispanic. Multivariable logistic regression model adjusted for age, gender, race, body mass index (BMI), tobacco and alcohol use, and hospitalization status with severity as the outcome showed an interaction between gender and BMI (p ≤ 0.01). Stratification by gender showed that obese females had decreased odds of severe esophagitis compared to normal BMI females (OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.07-0.47; p < 0.01). In males, the odds of esophagitis were higher in inpatient status (OR = 2.84, 95% CI = 1.52 - 5.28; p < 0.01) and as age increased (OR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.03 - 1.83; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We identify gender-specific associations with severe esophagitis in a predominantly Hispanic cohort. In females, obese BMI appears to be protective against severe esophagitis compared to normal BMI, while in men inpatient status and increasing age were associated with increased odds of severe esophagitis.

Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Novel Procedure for Gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has recently been considered for the surgical management of refractory gastroparesis. Our study aims to determine the efficacy of LSG as a new treatment modality for gastroparesis. METHODS: A multi-surgeon single institution retrospective chart review of patients who underwent LSG for refractory gastroparesis from September 2016-December 2017. Pre- and postoperative Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorders-Symptoms Severity Index and/or Gastroparesis Cardinal Symptom Index (GCSI) questionnaires were reviewed. A telephone survey was conducted. Statistical analysis consisted of two-sample t test and utilized SAS v9.4. A P-value <.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: There were 10 patients included and 80% were women with an average age of 43 years (24-63). Mean Body Mass Index was 24.5 (16.8-39.6), and median gastric emptying at 4 hours was 50% (30-85). Etiology of gastroparesis was 50% idiopathic, 40% diabetic, and 10% postsurgical. 80% of patients had previously undergone gastric electrical stimulator implantation, 20% pyloric botox injections, and 1 patient jejunostomy tube placement. One patient required conversion from laparoscopic to open secondary to adhesions. Median length of stay was 5 days (2-13), and median follow-up was 13.3 months. 90% of patients were tolerating a regular diet at longest follow-up with significant improvement in self-reported symptoms. GCSI scores were 33.6 preoperatively and 14.9 postoperatively (P = .01). DISCUSSION: Our study adds to the literature examining the role of LSG in the treatment of gastroparesis. LSG has favorable outcomes at short-term follow-up for patients with refractory gastroparesis.

Provocative testing of the esophagus and its future.

Standard tests in clinical practice commonly fail to demonstrate a clear esophageal etiology for symptoms such as heartburn, dysphagia, or chest pain. Over the years, various provocative measures have been developed to provide a better understanding of the origins of such symptoms. Some measures, such as esophageal acid infusion or changing bolus consistency, can be easily incorporated into clinical practice. Others, such as multimodal stimulation systems, are more technically demanding. They have contributed to a better understanding of esophageal physiology in health and disease. Their role in clinical decision making is still evolving. This focused review provides a summary of the esophageal nociceptive pathways and how provocative testing can be used to interrogate their integrity.

Effect of electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter in gastroesophageal reflux disease patients refractory to proton pump inhibitors.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of lower esophageal sphincter (LES)-electrical stimulation therapy (EST) in a subgroup of patients that reported only partial response to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) therapy, compared to a group of patient with complete response. METHODS: Bipolar stitch electrodes were laparoscopically placed in the LES and connected to an implantable pulse generator (EndoStim BV, the Hague, the Netherlands), placed subcutaneously in the anterior abdominal wall. Stimulation at 20 Hz, 215 µsec, 3-8 mAmp in 30 min sessions was delivered starting on day 1 post-implant. Patients were evaluated using gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD)-HRQL, symptom diaries; esophageal pH and esophageal manometry before and up to 24 mo after therapy and results were compared between partial and complete responders. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients with GERD on LES-EST were enrolled and received continuous per-protocol stimulation through 12 mo and 21 patients completed 24 mo of therapy. Of the 23 patients, 16 (8 male, mean age 52.1 ± 12 years) had incomplete response to PPIs prior to LES-EST, while 7 patients (5 male, mean age 52.7 ± 4.7) had complete response to PPIs. In the sub-group with incomplete response to PPIs, median (IQR) composite GERD-HRQL score improved significantly from 9.5 (9.0-10.0) at baseline on-PPI and 24.0 (20.8-26.3) at baseline off-PPI to 2.5 (0.0-4.0) at 12-mo and 0.0 (0.0-2.5) at 24-mo follow-up (P < 0.05 compared to on-and off-PPI at baseline). Median (IQR) % 24-h esophageal pH < 4.0 at baseline in this sub-group improved significantly from 9.8% (7.8-11.5) at baseline to 3.0% (1.9-6.3) at 12 mo (P < 0.001) and 4.6% (2.0-5.8) at 24 mo follow-up (P < 0.01). At their 24-mo follow-up, 9/11 patients in this sub-group were completely free of PPI use. These results were comparable to the sub-group that reported complete response to PPI therapy at baseline. No unanticipated implantation or stimulation-related adverse events, or any untoward sensation due to stimulation were reported in either group and LES-EST was safely tolerated by both groups. CONCLUSION: LES-EST is safe and effective in controlling symptoms and esophageal acid exposure in GERD patients with incomplete response to PPIs. These results were comparable to those observed PPI responders.

Electrical stimulation for gastroesophageal reflux disease: current state of the art.

Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) who are not satisfied with acid suppression therapy can benefit primarily from fundoplication, a surgical intervention. Fundoplication has been the standard surgical procedure for GERD. It is effective but is associated with adverse effects, resulting in a declining number of interventions, creating a need for alternative interventions that are effective, yet have a better adverse effect profile. One such alternative involves the application of electrical stimulation to the lower esophageal sphincter. A number of animal studies showed that such stimulation can increase resting lower esophageal sphincter pressure. An acute human study confirmed this effect, and was followed by two open-label studies, with a follow-up of up to 3 years. Results thus far show that the therapy is associated with a significant improvement in symptoms, a significant reduction in esophageal acid exposure, and a very good safety profile. This review will describe the evolution of electrical stimulation therapy for GERD, as well as the safety and efficacy of this intervention.

Electrical stimulation therapy of the lower esophageal sphincter is successful in treating GERD: long-term 3-year results.

BACKGROUND: Electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) at 2 years. The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LES stimulation in the same cohort at 3 years. METHODS: GERD patients with partial response to PPI, with % 24-h esophageal pH < 4.0 for >5 %, with hiatal hernia <3 cm and with esophagitis ≤LA grade C were treated with LES stimulation in an open-label 2-year trial. All patients were on fixed stimulation parameter of 20 Hz, 220 µs, 5 mA delivered in twelve, 30-min sessions. After completing the 2-year open-label study, they were offered enrollment into a multicenter registry trial and were evaluated using GERD-HRQL, symptom diaries and pH testing at their 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Fifteen patients completed their 3-year evaluation [mean (SD) age = 56.1 (9.7) years; men = 8] on LES stimulation. At 3 years, there was a significant improvement in their median (IQR) GERD-HRQL on electrical stimulation compared to both their on PPI [9 (6-10) vs. 1 (0-2), p = 0.001] and off PPI [22 (21-24) vs. 1 (0-2), p < 0.001]. Median 24-h distal esophageal acid exposure was significantly reduced from [10.3 (7.5-11.6) % at baseline vs. 3 (1.9-4.5) %, p < 0.001] at 3 years. Seventy-three % (11/15) patients had normalized their distal esophageal acid exposure at 3 years. Remaining four patients had improved their distal esophageal acid exposure by 39-48 % from baseline. All but four patients reported cessation of regular PPI use (>50 % of days with PPI use); three had normal esophageal pH at 3 years. There were no unanticipated device- or stimulation-related adverse events or untoward sensation reported during the 2- to 3-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: LES-EST is safe and effective for treating patients with GERD over long-term, 3-year duration. There was a significant and sustained improvement in esophageal acid exposure and reduction in GERD symptoms and PPI use. Further, no new GI side effects or adverse events were reported.

The Effect of Dietary Intervention on Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Elimination diets have been used for many years to treat irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). These approaches had fallen out of favor until a recent resurgence, which was based on new randomized controlled trial (RCT) data that suggested it might be effective. The evidence for the efficacy of dietary therapies has not been evaluated systematically. We have therefore conducted a systematic review to examine this issue. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched up to December 2013. Trials recruiting adults with IBS, which compared any form of dietary restriction or addition of an offending food group in patients already on a restricted diet vs. placebo, control therapy, or "usual management", were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk of remaining symptomatic after therapy as well as the number needed to treat with a 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: We identified 17 RCTs involving 1,568 IBS patients that assessed elimination diets. Only three RCTs involving 230 patients met our eligibility criteria, all of which evaluated different approaches, and thus a meta-analysis could not be conducted. CONCLUSIONS: More evidence is needed before generally recommending elimination diets for IBS patients.

Novel surgical options for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

There are limited options to patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) who are not satisfied with acid suppression therapy. Fundoplication, the standard surgical procedure for GERD, is effective but is associated with adverse side effects and has thus been performed less frequently, creating a need for alternative surgical interventions that are effective, yet less invasive and reversible. Lately, two such interventions were developed: the magnetic sphincter augmentation and electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter. Human studies describing safety and efficacy over a follow-up period of a number of years have been published, documenting efficacy and safety of these interventions. Future studies should clarify the role of these procedures in the spectrum of GERD therapy.

Two-year results of intermittent electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Lower esophageal sphincter (LES) electrical stimulation therapy (EST) has been shown to improve outcome in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients at 1 year. The aim of this open-label extension trial (NCT01578642) was to study the 2-year safety and efficacy of LES-EST in GERD patients. METHODS: GERD patients responsive partially to proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with off-PPI GERD health-related quality of life (HRQL) of ≥20, 24-hour esophageal pH ≤4.0 for >5% of the time, hiatal hernia ≤3 cm, and esophagitis LA grade C or lower participated in this trial. Bipolar stitch electrodes and a pulse generator (EndoStim BV, The Hague, The Netherlands) were implanted laparoscopically. LES-EST at 20 Hz, 215 µs, 3-8 mAmp was delivered over 30-minute sessions, 6-12 sessions per day, starting on day 1 after implantation. Patients were evaluated using GERD-HRQL, symptom diaries, Short Form-12, and esophageal pH testing at regular intervals. Stimulation sessions were optimized based on residual symptoms and esophageal pH at follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (mean age [SD] = 52 [12] years; 14 men) were implanted successfully; 23 patients participated in the 2-year extension trial, and 21 completed their 2-year evaluation. At 2 years, there was improvement in their median GERD-HRQL on LES-EST compared with both their on-PPI (9 vs 0; P = .001) and off-PPI (23.5 vs. 0; P < .001) baseline scores. Median 24-hour distal esophageal acid exposure improved from 10% at baseline to 4% (per-protocol analysis; P < .001) at 2 years with 71% demonstrating either normalization or a ≥50% decrease in their distal esophageal acid exposure. All except 5 patients (16/21) reported complete cessation of PPI use; only 2 patients were using a PPI regularly (≥50% of days). There was significant improvement in sleep quality and daily symptoms of heartburn and regurgitation on LES-EST. At baseline, 92% of the subjects (22/24) reported that they were "unsatisfied" with their condition off-PPI and 71% (17/24) on-PPI compared with 0% (0/21) "unsatisfied" at the 24-month visits on LES-EST. There were no device- or therapy-related serious adverse events and no untoward sensation or dysphagia reported with LES-EST. CONCLUSION: LES-EST is safe and effective for treating patients with GERD over a period of 2 years. LES-EST resulted in a significant and sustained improvement in GERD symptoms, and esophageal acid exposure and eliminated PPI use in majority of patients (16 of 21). Further, LES-EST was not associated with any gastrointestinal side effects or adverse events.

Gastric electrical stimulation for obesity.

Obesity is a growing health problem worldwide with a major impact on health and healthcare expenditures. Medical therapy in the form of diet and pharmacotherapy has limited effect on weight. Standard bariatric surgery is effective but is associated with morbidity and mortality, creating an unmet need for alternative therapies. One such therapy, the application of electrical stimulation to the stomach, has been studied extensively for the last two decades. Though pulse parameters differ between the various techniques used, the rationale behind this assumes that application of electrical current can interfere with gastric motor function or modulate afferent signaling to the brain or both. Initial studies led by industry failed to show an effect on body weight. However, more recently, there has been a renewed interest in this therapeutic modality with a number of concepts being evaluated in large human trials. If successful, this minimally invasive and low-risk intervention would be an important addition to the existing menu of therapies for obesity.

Efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics in irritable bowel syndrome and chronic idiopathic constipation: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) are functional bowel disorders. Evidence suggests that disturbance in the gastrointestinal microbiota may be implicated in both conditions. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics in IBS and CIC. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to December 2013). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with IBS or CIC, which compared prebiotics, probiotics, or synbiotics with placebo or no therapy, were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic after therapy, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous data were pooled using a standardized or weighted mean difference with a 95% CI. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 3,216 citations. Forty-three RCTs were eligible for inclusion. The RR of IBS symptoms persisting with probiotics vs. placebo was 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.89). Probiotics had beneficial effects on global IBS, abdominal pain, bloating, and flatulence scores. Data for prebiotics and synbiotics in IBS were sparse. Probiotics appeared to have beneficial effects in CIC (mean increase in number of stools per week=1.49; 95% CI=1.02-1.96), but there were only two RCTs. Synbiotics also appeared beneficial (RR of failure to respond to therapy=0.78; 95% CI 0.67-0.92). Again, trials for prebiotics were few in number, and no definite conclusions could be drawn. CONCLUSIONS: Probiotics are effective treatments for IBS, although which individual species and strains are the most beneficial remains unclear. Further evidence is required before the role of prebiotics or synbiotics in IBS is known. The efficacy of all three therapies in CIC is also uncertain.

The effect of fiber supplementation on irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Fiber has been used for many years to treat irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). This approach had fallen out of favor until a recent resurgence, which was based on new randomized controlled trial (RCT) data that suggested it might be effective. We have previously conducted a systematic review of fiber in IBS, but new RCT data for fiber therapy necessitate a new analysis; thus, we have conducted a systematic review of this intervention. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched up to December 2013. Trials recruiting adults with IBS, which compared fiber supplements with placebo, control therapy, or "usual management", were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic after therapy as well as number needed to treat (NNT) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: We identified 14 RCTs involving 906 patients that had evaluated fiber in IBS. There was a significant benefit of fiber in IBS (RR=0.86; 95% CI 0.80-0.94 with an NNT=10; 95% CI=6-33). There was no significant heterogeneity between results (I(2)=0%, Cochran Q=13.85 (d.f.=14), P=0.46). The benefit was only seen in RCTs on soluble fiber (RR=0.83; 95% CI 0.73-0.94 with an NNT=7; 95% CI 4-25) with no effect seen with bran (RR=0.90; 95% CI 0.79-1.03). CONCLUSIONS: Soluble fiber is effective in treating IBS. Bran did not appear to be of benefit, although we did not uncover any evidence of harm from this intervention, as others have speculated from uncontrolled data.

Long-term results of electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter for treatment of proximal GERD.

INTRODUCTION: Electrical stimulation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients, using EndoStim(®) LES stimulation system (EndoStim BV, the Hague, Netherlands), enhances LES pressure, decrease distal esophageal acid exposure, improves symptoms, and eliminates the need in many patients for daily GERD medications. AIM: To evaluate, in a post hoc analysis, the effect of LES stimulation on proximal esophageal acid exposure in a subgroup of patients with abnormal proximal esophageal acid exposure. METHODS: Nineteen patients (median age 54 years; IQR 47-64; men-10) with GERD partially responsive to proton pump inhibitors (PPI), hiatal hernia ≤ 3 cm, esophagitis ≤ LA grade C underwent laparoscopic implantation of the LES stimulator. LES stimulation at 20 Hz, 215 µs, 5-8 m Amp sessions was delivered in 6-12, 30 min sessions each day. Esophageal pH at baseline and after 12-months of LES stimulation was measured 5 and 23 cm above the manometric upper border of LES. RESULTS: Total, upright and supine values of median (IQR) proximal esophageal pH at baseline were 0.4 (0.1-1.4), 0.6 (0.2-2.3), and 0 (0.0-0.2) %, respectively, and at 12 months on LES-EST were 0 (0-0) % (p = 0.001 total and upright; p = 0.043 supine comparisons). 24-hour distal esophageal acid exposure improved from 10.2 (7.6-11.7) to 3.4 (1.6-7.0) % (p = 0.001). Seven (37%) patients had abnormal (>1.1%) 24-hour proximal acid exposure at baseline; all normalized at 12 months (p = 0.008). In these 7 patients, total, upright, and supine median proximal acid exposure values at baseline were 1.7 (1.3-4.1), 2.9 (1.9-3.7), and 0.3 (0-4.9) %, respectively, and after 12 months of LES-EST were 0 (0-0.0), 0 (0-0.1), and 0 (0-0) % (p = 0.018 total and upright; p = 0.043 supine comparisons). Distal esophageal pH for this group improved from 9.3 (7.8-17.2) at baseline to 3.2 (1.1-3.7) % at 12-months (p = 0.043). There were no GI side effects such as dysphagia, gas-bloat or diarrhea or device or procedure related serious adverse events with LES-EST. There was also a significant improvement in their GERD-HRQL scores. CONCLUSION: LES-EST is associated with normalization of proximal esophageal pH in patients with GERD and may be useful in treating those with proximal GERD. The LES-EST is safe without typical side effects associated with traditional antireflux surgery.

Effect of antidepressants and psychological therapies, including hypnotherapy, in irritable bowel syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic functional gastrointestinal disorder. Evidence relating to the treatment of this condition with antidepressants and psychological therapies continues to accumulate. METHODS: We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to December 2013). Trials recruiting adults with IBS, which compared antidepressants with placebo, or psychological therapies with control therapy or "usual management," were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic after therapy, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The search strategy identified 3,788 citations. Forty-eight RCTs were eligible for inclusion: thirty-one compared psychological therapies with control therapy or "usual management," sixteen compared antidepressants with placebo, and one compared both psychological therapy and antidepressants with placebo. Ten of the trials of psychological therapies, and four of the RCTs of antidepressants, had been published since our previous meta-analysis. The RR of IBS symptom not improving with antidepressants vs. placebo was 0.67 (95% CI=0.58-0.77), with similar treatment effects for both tricyclic antidepressants and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. The RR of symptoms not improving with psychological therapies was 0.68 (95% CI=0.61-0.76). Cognitive behavioral therapy, hypnotherapy, multicomponent psychological therapy, and dynamic psychotherapy were all beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: Antidepressants and some psychological therapies are effective treatments for IBS. Despite the considerable number of studies published in the intervening 5 years since we last examined this issue, the overall summary estimates of treatment effect have remained remarkably stable.

Successful gastric volvulus reduction and gastropexy using a dual endoscope technique.

Gastric volvulus is a life threatening condition characterized by an abnormal rotation of the stomach around an axis. Although the first line treatment of this disorder is surgical, we report here a case of gastric volvulus that was endoscopically managed using a novel strategy. An 83-year-old female with a history of pancreatic cancer status postpylorus-preserving Whipple procedure presented with a cecal volvulus requiring right hemicolectomy. Postoperative imaging included a CT scan and upper GI series that showed a gastric volvulus with the antrum located above the diaphragm. An upper endoscopy was advanced through the pylorus into the duodenum and left in this position to keep the stomach under the diaphragm. A second pediatric endoscope was advanced alongside and used to complete percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement for anterior gastropexy. The patient's volvulus resolved and there were no complications. From our review of the literature, the dual endoscopic technique employed here has not been previously described. Patients who are poor surgical candidates or those who do not require emergent surgery can possibly benefit the most from similar minimally invasive endoscopic procedures as described here.

Recorded lower esophageal pressures as a function of electronic sleeve placement and location of gastric pressure measurement in patients with hiatal hernia.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: In high-resolution manometry lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP) is measured relative to intragastric pressure, however Gastric Marker™ (GM) location used to determine resting LESP is not well established with hiatal hernia (HH). We test the hypothesis that measured resting LESP varies with HH based on GM location. METHODS: Subjects with HH ≥ 2 cm were included. The eSleeve™ was adjusted to span only the LES, excluding the crural diaphragm (CD). Resting LESP was determined by placing the GM below and above the CD (in the position yielding the highest resting LESP). Resting pressure across the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) to CD and pressure in the HH relative to subdiaphragmatic intragastric pressure were also measured. RESULTS: HH ≥ 2 cm was present in 98 patients (mean length 2.7 cm). LESP decreased when GM was moved from below the CD into the HH: respiratory minimum LESP 7.5 ± 1.1 to 3.6 ± 0.9 mmHg; P < 0.001, mean LESP 17.7 ± 1.3 to 13.7 ± 1.1 mmHg; P < 0.001. When the eSleeve encompassed the LES and CD, the respiratory minimum pressure was 12.2 ± 0.9 mmHg and mean pressure was 23.9 ± 1.0 mmHg pressure (P < 0.001 for both). Pressure in the hernia pouch was greater than intragastric pressure: respiratory minimum 3.0 ± 0.7 mmHg and mean 9.0 ± 0.8 mmHg (P < 0.001 for both). pH studies showed a trend toward an association between abnormal distal esophagus acid exposure and lower resting LESP. CONCLUSIONS: GM placement in the HH produces lower resting LESPs. This may provide a more physiologic representation of LESP in HH.